When does the Obama bashing stop?

[2Adam29]

Why is it that every time I go look in the general topics forum, I don't look far before seeing a huge thread about the latest hate piece from Fox news about Obama, followed by post after post of hate for the Commander in Chief and those who support him? I just don't get it. This man is now the top dog in law enforcement. That's what the executive branch is all about, yet this ugly, hatefilled mindset takes over the ideology of the men and women of these forums, many of whom now in-directly work below him.

Yes, I voted for the man, and while I haven't fallen in love with everything he has done, for the most part, he hasn't really screwed up. Yes he spent a lot of money, but as they say, it takes money to make money, and a spending bill was the only feesible way out of the economic decline, at least in many people's thinking.

Not only this, but Obama has reached out on numerous occassions to Republicans for bi-partisanship, and was slapped down, with a resounding, "our way or the highway" from the GOP.

I don't like Democrats, they are full of themselves and treat conservatives like idiots. But Obama hasn't become a Pelosi, or a Olberman. He is still a man of ideals who reaches out for compromise. Why won't he see this back from people on the right? Even the people on this forum, who have little reason to dislike the man who has given taxbreaks and attemped to rescue the economy, still find it in their duty to berate and knock down the ruler of the free world, for little more reason than, "it's fun to hate."

[2001GTTT]

Nnnnnneevvvvvvaaaarrrrrr!!!!!!

[2Adam29]

Nnnnnneevvvvvvaaaarrrrrr!!!!!!

lol. I know... seems a bit lofty to hope that repubs can respect the president, but hey! I'm an idealist! ;)

[2001GTTT]

sorry...I have no opinion other than to be an idiot.

mission accomplished. : )

[madchiken]

Sometime in late January 2013...

[2001GTTT]

lol. this guy.^^^

I like him.

[ford123]

lol. I know... seems a bit lofty to hope that repubs can respect the president, but hey! I'm an idealist! ;)

After all the libs said, and accused of Bush???

It is open season.

[The Dude]

After all the libs said, and accused of Bush???

It is open season.

+1.

Hate hate hate. I love the use of that buzzword for everything conservative people have to say in protest of people who are literally ruining America as we know it. It seems to me that all the hate is coming from the left, they hate America, hate God, and hate the military. They hate people who try to protect the unborn, they hate wealthy capitalists who create jobs, they hate the police. They are the ones taking crosses off war memorials, the 10 commandments off the courthouse and the manger scene off the town hall lawn.

I personally feel that Hussein and people like him hate me and what I believe in, and wish to take from me and restrict me, even though the values I hold dear have nothing to do with hating, hurting or depriving anyone.

So as long as Hussein is on his little crusade to "change" America and become a dictator, and as long as we still have the freedom to do so, we will try to counter with truth.

"I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say, we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration." -Hillary Clinton

[ford123]

+1.

"I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say, we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration." -Hillary Clinton

Wow. I forgot about that one.

[FNA209]

Is this another whine? :p Or an attempt to generate information for a school project?

Based on recent history:

We lived through eight years of Bush bashing. Let's see- "Bush lied- people died" and "Bush isn't my President" were two of the more common themes we heard for eight years.

Now Obama is President. He is just as distatsteful to some of us as Bush was to others. IMO, we can't say things like "Obama lied- people died" because he hasn't gone as far as he wants to yet. But it's not for a lack of trying and he'll get there.

Yet, we hear the call from the very people who maligned Bush for so long to give the new guy a chance? Why? Many of us already don't like what he has done so far. How long are we supposed to give him?



Post after post of hate for the Commander in Chief and those who support him? I just don't get it. This man is now the top dog in law enforcement.



Top Dog for whom in law enforcement? There is nothing in my oath of office that makes me even remotely in his chain of command. He is also not my Commander-in-Chief as I am not in the military anymore.



Yes he spent a lot of money, but as they say, it takes money to make money, and a spending bill was the only feesible way out of the economic decline, at least in many people's thinking.



Deficit spending your way to prosperity? It wouldn’t work. That money he is spending is my money. Once you graduate from college, it’ll be your money. The piper will come calling. You won’t be able to afford the bill.



Not only this, but Obama has reached out on numerous occassions to Republicans for bi-partisanship, and was slapped down, with a resounding, "our way or the highway" from the GOP.



:eek:

The president said, "I won. So I think on that one, I trump you." He and his Congress buddies are not being bi-partisan. They are saying, “We hold the majority and we are going to do what we want.”



Even the people on this forum, who have little reason to dislike the man who has given taxbreaks and attemped to rescue the economy, still find it in their duty to berate and knock down the ruler of the free world, for little more reason than, "it's fun to hate."



Tax breaks? Do you really think I got a tax break? Wow is about the best I can say. You have to show me where I now spend less in direct taxes and where I spend less for services and products because the companies I buy from are paying less in taxes. In case you don't understand- when a company pays more in taxes, my cost goes up. Taxes filter down to the consumer as higher prices. In essence, the consumer pays the increase in taxes.

Attempted to rescue the economy? There are those (I’m sure you discount them as wrong) who say he definitely isn’t rescuing it. Ruin may be a better choice of words.

Knock down and berate the ruler of the free world? It almost appears he’s knocking down and berating my country all on his own. We’re supposed to like that? I'm supposed to like his pandering to third world despots? Thanks, but I'll continue to voice my objects to any leader of this country who does that.

Which brings us to “little reason to dislike the man”.

IMO, many of us dislike him because we believe he is doing things to this country that we may never recover from.

Many of us dislike him because he is attempting to gain governmental control over things the government should not control.

Many of us dislike him because we don’t want a bigger government that is fast becoming a nanny state where we are subjects rather than citizens. We don’t like big government and we don't want the government in our lives. We don't consider ourselves wards of the federal government.

But the main reason many of us are critical of Obama is because we can be. Read my sig-line. As Americans, we have both the right and the duty to speak out when our elected officials take us somewhere we don't think the US should go.

[tony.o]

Originally Posted by 2Adam29

Not only this, but Obama has reached out on numerous occassions to Republicans for bi-partisanship, and was slapped down, with a resounding, "our way or the highway" from the GOP.


Wow, what a piece of misinformation. Its the other way around, genius. :rolleyes:

[dadyswat]

FNA209 Way to Go!!! You summed it up very well. This guy is going to make Jimmy Carter look good.

[Highwaylaw]

2adam29...you are a 19 year old college student. There is a Mark Twain quote that goes something like this:
"When I was a young man, I was amazed at how little my father knew. By the time I reached that age myself, I was amazed at how much he'd learned."

I cant' speak for anyone but me, and all I can tell you is that I find it reprehensible that the President of the United States is travelling the globe apologizing for America, nearly kissing the feet of the Saudi king, handing out dvd's and ipods to heads of state and dignitaries, laughing it up with Hugo Chavez,etc.
All this as he cuts the defense budget, shuts down GITMO, handcuffs the CIA, CUTS BENEFITS FOR FAMILIES OF COPS KILLED IN THE LINE OF DUTY, waits 5 days to take action as an american vessel is hijacked, embraces abortion and infanticide, fires the ceo of a PRIVATE company, wastes nearly 400k on a photo op for AirForce One that terrorizes Manhattan island, hires a guy who can't do his OWN taxes as treasurey secretary, nominates a handful of other folks that have to back out for similar reasons, and saddles my kids and grandkids with a debt that they will never be able to get out from under.
You do have to spend money to make money. There is a tremendous difference however, between "spending" and "handing out".

[Bowana]

Great post FNA209!!!

[PigsdoFly]

Is this another whine? :p Or an attempt to generate information for a school project?

Based on recent history:

We lived through eight years of Bush bashing. Let's see- "Bush lied- people died" and "Bush isn't my President" were two of the more common themes we heard for eight years.

Now Obama is President. He is just as distatsteful to some of us as Bush was to others. IMO, we can't say things like "Obama lied- people died" because he hasn't gone as far as he wants to yet. But it's not for a lack of trying and he'll get there.

Yet, we hear the call from the very people who maligned Bush for so long to give the new guy a chance? Why? Many of us already don't like what he has done so far. How long are we supposed to give him?



Top Dog for whom in law enforcement? There is nothing in my oath of office that makes me even remotely in his chain of command. He is also not my Commander-in-Chief as I am not in the military anymore.



Deficit spending your way to prosperity? It wouldn’t work. That money he is spending is my money. Once you graduate from college, it’ll be your money. The piper will come calling. You won’t be able to afford the bill.



:eek:

The president said, "I won. So I think on that one, I trump you." He and his Congress buddies are not being bi-partisan. They are saying, “We hold the majority and we are going to do what we want.”



Tax breaks? Do you really think I got a tax break? Wow is about the best I can say. You have to show me where I now spend less in direct taxes and where I spend less for services and products because the companies I buy from are paying less in taxes. In case you don't understand- when a company pays more in taxes, my cost goes up. Taxes filter down to the consumer as higher prices. In essence, the consumer pays the increase in taxes.

Attempted to rescue the economy? There are those (I’m sure you discount them as wrong) who say he definitely isn’t rescuing it. Ruin may be a better choice of words.

Knock down and berate the ruler of the free world? It almost appears he’s knocking down and berating my country all on his own. We’re supposed to like that? I'm supposed to like his pandering to third world despots? Thanks, but I'll continue to voice my objects to any leader of this country who does that.

Which brings us to “little reason to dislike the man”.

IMO, many of us dislike him because we believe he is doing things to this country that we may never recover from.

Many of us dislike him because he is attempting to gain governmental control over things the government should not control.

Many of us dislike him because we don’t want a bigger government that is fast becoming a nanny state where we are subjects rather than citizens. We don’t like big government and we don't want the government in our lives. We don't consider ourselves wards of the federal government.

But the main reason many of us are critical of Obama is because we can be. Read my sig-line. As Americans, we have both the right and the duty to speak out when our elected officials take us somewhere we don't think the US should go.

I likey....

[LAschoolCop]

Why is it that every time I go look in the general topics forum, I don't look far before seeing a huge thread about the latest hate piece from Fox news about Obama, followed by post after post of hate for the Commander in Chief and those who support him? I just don't get it. This man is now the top dog in law enforcement. That's what the executive branch is all about, yet this ugly, hatefilled mindset takes over the ideology of the men and women of these forums, many of whom now in-directly work below him.

Yes, I voted for the man, and while I haven't fallen in love with everything he has done, for the most part, he hasn't really screwed up. Yes he spent a lot of money, but as they say, it takes money to make money, and a spending bill was the only feesible way out of the economic decline, at least in many people's thinking.

Not only this, but Obama has reached out on numerous occassions to Republicans for bi-partisanship, and was slapped down, with a resounding, "our way or the highway" from the GOP.

I don't like Democrats, they are full of themselves and treat conservatives like idiots. But Obama hasn't become a Pelosi, or a Olberman. He is still a man of ideals who reaches out for compromise. Why won't he see this back from people on the right? Even the people on this forum, who have little reason to dislike the man who has given taxbreaks and attemped to rescue the economy, still find it in their duty to berate and knock down the ruler of the free world, for little more reason than, "it's fun to hate."

+1.....them people never will they never will.....:(

[2Adam29]

Originally Posted by 2Adam29

Not only this, but Obama has reached out on numerous occassions to Republicans for bi-partisanship, and was slapped down, with a resounding, "our way or the highway" from the GOP.


Wow, what a piece of misinformation. Its the other way around, genius. :rolleyes:

someone please tell me what the hell republicans have done to reach out... all I've seen is republicans saying, "sure.. we'll vote for it... If its EXACTLY what we want." Rather than actually searching for compromise.

[LAschoolCop]

2adam29...you are a 19 year old college student. There is a Mark Twain quote that goes something like this:
"When I was a young man, I was amazed at how little my father knew. By the time I reached that age myself, I was amazed at how much he'd learned."

I cant' speak for anyone but me, and all I can tell you is that I find it reprehensible that the President of the United States is travelling the globe apologizing for America, nearly kissing the feet of the Saudi king, handing out dvd's and ipods to heads of state and dignitaries, laughing it up with Hugo Chavez,etc.
All this as he cuts the defense budget, shuts down GITMO, handcuffs the CIA, CUTS BENEFITS FOR FAMILIES OF COPS KILLED IN THE LINE OF DUTY, waits 5 days to take action as an american vessel is hijacked, embraces abortion and infanticide, fires the ceo of a PRIVATE company, wastes nearly 400k on a photo op for AirForce One that terrorizes Manhattan island, hires a guy who can't do his OWN taxes as treasurey secretary, nominates a handful of other folks that have to back out for similar reasons, and saddles my kids and grandkids with a debt that they will never be able to get out from under.
You do have to spend money to make money. There is a tremendous difference however, between "spending" and "handing out".

Why I voted for him :D:D

[2Adam29]

Is this another whine? :p Or an attempt to generate information for a school project?

Based on recent history:

We lived through eight years of Bush bashing. Let's see- "Bush lied- people died" and "Bush isn't my President" were two of the more common themes we heard for eight years.

Now Obama is President. He is just as distatsteful to some of us as Bush was to others. IMO, we can't say things like "Obama lied- people died" because he hasn't gone as far as he wants to yet. But it's not for a lack of trying and he'll get there.

Yet, we hear the call from the very people who maligned Bush for so long to give the new guy a chance? Why? Many of us already don't like what he has done so far. How long are we supposed to give him?



Top Dog for whom in law enforcement? There is nothing in my oath of office that makes me even remotely in his chain of command. He is also not my Commander-in-Chief as I am not in the military anymore.



Deficit spending your way to prosperity? It wouldn’t work. That money he is spending is my money. Once you graduate from college, it’ll be your money. The piper will come calling. You won’t be able to afford the bill.



:eek:

The president said, "I won. So I think on that one, I trump you." He and his Congress buddies are not being bi-partisan. They are saying, “We hold the majority and we are going to do what we want.”



Tax breaks? Do you really think I got a tax break? Wow is about the best I can say. You have to show me where I now spend less in direct taxes and where I spend less for services and products because the companies I buy from are paying less in taxes. In case you don't understand- when a company pays more in taxes, my cost goes up. Taxes filter down to the consumer as higher prices. In essence, the consumer pays the increase in taxes.

Attempted to rescue the economy? There are those (I’m sure you discount them as wrong) who say he definitely isn’t rescuing it. Ruin may be a better choice of words.

Knock down and berate the ruler of the free world? It almost appears he’s knocking down and berating my country all on his own. We’re supposed to like that? I'm supposed to like his pandering to third world despots? Thanks, but I'll continue to voice my objects to any leader of this country who does that.

Which brings us to “little reason to dislike the man”.

IMO, many of us dislike him because we believe he is doing things to this country that we may never recover from.

Many of us dislike him because he is attempting to gain governmental control over things the government should not control.

Many of us dislike him because we don’t want a bigger government that is fast becoming a nanny state where we are subjects rather than citizens. We don’t like big government and we don't want the government in our lives. We don't consider ourselves wards of the federal government.

But the main reason many of us are critical of Obama is because we can be. Read my sig-line. As Americans, we have both the right and the duty to speak out when our elected officials take us somewhere we don't think the US should go.


I would think the "they started it" mentality would be a little beneath grown adults who claim that the bush bashing means it is free reign for Obama bashing. I guess not. For the record, I didn't dislike Bush as a person. He occassionally made me embarassed because I felt his level of intelegence did not show through properly and I tended to disagree with many of his policies, but as a human being, and even as a politician, I felt he was trying the majority of the time to follow the wishes of at least some of his constituents.

as far as the law enforcement thing goes. I guess I'm kind of basing it on principle... whatever, it's not that important.

What do you propose to do to fix the economy? Last time we had a depression it was massive government spending that helped us climb out of it in the form of a war. (if memory serves) I don't see why we cant let the economy recover, then scale back and gradually move into a more financially stable plan. I know its been said many times before and all, but if the economy recovers quickly, we might just make a dent in the deficit before the next president comes into office.

I'm not doubting that democrats are being morons sitting in a corner with bags on their heads screaming, "we dont need republicans!" I don't like them either. However, I don't think Obama is as far gone as the rest of them. He's made cutbacks to many government programs including one that drew much unnessessary attention from these forums in the form of a bill designed to financially assist families of slain law enforcement officers. However, it was just a cut to how much money is set aside for the program, as the program will consume as much money as is nessessary reguardless.

I understand that people don't want big government. Obama has said he doesn't really want it either, but in order to weather the current storm, it seems we need to batton down the hatches here and get the government involved to save several industries that are hanging on the brink of disaster.

Of course you don't have to like him. I'm not claiming that hes got to be some sort of god to you like he is to Olberman or Maddow... at the same time, why do we need to start back into the politics as usual game of insulting the president on a personal level just because we don't care for his policies? Better yet, my original problem persists... Why do they talk about these things in the "general" forum when this is clearly the forum for political discussion?

[2Adam29]

Because hes a POS president that is doing more to hurt this great country than good. Your a college student, not surprised you voted for him

yeah, because people in higher education can't possibly be informed voters. For the record, I learned about all presidential candidates and their stances on the issues before making my choice. I didn't just vote for and campaign for him because he was popular. I live in Nebraska. Democrats tend to be unpopular here.

[Columbus]

Bush isn't my president, he should be impeached, he should be thrown in jail, Bush lied, yada yada yada.

And you think what people say about Obama is harsh? Grow a skin.

[hemicop]

Simple---when he starts doing something right.....:D

[Ducatista]

Sometime in late January 2013...

Make that 2016...I am sure it will take a wee bit longer.

[2Adam29]

Bush isn't my president, he should be impeached, he should be thrown in jail, Bush lied, yada yada yada.

And you think what people say about Obama is harsh? Grow a skin.

I'm not defending what people said about bush, and I get that Obama is a public figure, but it just seems like people love to throw hate around on this forum. Can't you disagree without being disagreeable? Say, "I think that plan will run us into the ground" rather than "Barack Osama is a POS who hates our country!"

I think anyone with half a brain can see that Obama loves his country, even if you disagree with his method of attempting to rescue it.

[Columbus]

I'm not defending what people said about bush, and I get that Obama is a public figure, but it just seems like people love to throw hate around on this forum. Can't you disagree without being disagreeable? Say, "I think that plan will run us into the ground" rather than "Barack Osama is a POS who hates our country!"

I think anyone with half a brain can see that Obama loves his country, even if you disagree with his method of attempting to rescue it.

Then where were you when people did it about Bush (about 10x worse might I add)?

[2Adam29]

Then where were you when people did it about Bush (about 10x worse might I add)?

like I've said earlier, I don't pretend to defend the Bush bashers, but just because others have been juvenile doesn't mean the cycle has to continue.

For the record, I never once doubted that former president Bush loved his country. My qualms with him stemmed from a feeling that he didn't portray the United States in a way I appreciated and that some of his policies conflicted with my views. He was not a monster by any means, just not my idea of who I'd like running the country. Obama falls short in some aspects too, but he has gotten much closer in my opinion.

I'm hoping we can gather the common decency to quit the personal attacks on our leaders for their political policy.

[hemicop]

I'm not defending what people said about bush, and I get that Obama is a public figure, but it just seems like people love to throw hate around on this forum. Can't you disagree without being disagreeable? Say, "I think that plan will run us into the ground" rather than "Barack Osama is a POS who hates our country!"

I think anyone with half a brain can see that Obama loves his country, even if you disagree with his method of attempting to rescue it.

I couldn't disagree more! He "apologizes" for our "behavior", has criticized the prevoius Administration (instead of simply being quiet), BOWS to a forgein leader whose country is known for human rights violations, tries to tie the hands of the very people that have worked to save this Country and has put this Country in debt for decades to come! THAT hardly sounds like a man that "loves" his Country.............

[Nikk]

Why is it that every time I go look in the general topics forum, I don't look far before seeing a huge thread about the latest hate piece from Fox news about Obama, followed by post after post of hate for the Commander in Chief and those who support him? I just don't get it.

"Hate" is a very strong word. I don't see all of the things as bashing. I see categories of people's comments:

- There are those who are sincerely concerned about the direction they feel he is taking America because they disagree with that direction. That's not hate, and that can be a productive discussion if people leave emotions and defensiveness out of it.

- There are those who will disagree with any Democrat, it just happens to be Obama this time. They aren't haters, they're Republicans.


- Then there are the emotional ones, who instead of asking "Will this 'budget cut' actually deny any slain officer's families their full benefits?" (it won't) will instead say "Obama hates law enforcement!" Now when Bush cut the Save the Burro program (or which ever Prez did that) there was probably an animal lover saying "Bush hates Burros!" That's not hate either, it's emotional reactions to sensationalized headlines regarding things you're passionate about.

- Then there are those who have decided to disapprove of everything and anything he does, even though if their candidate did the exact same thing they'd support or defend it. They aren't haters, they're just stubborn! They've always existed on both sides of the fence.

-Then there are actual "bashers" who still repeat the silly things they heard (like a picture of him singing the national anthem with the tag line that he isn't saying the pledge... ) and mock him and make fun of him in general. I don't think they hate him, however, and there aren't really as many of them as it seems.

In other words, I think it's just normal in a forum that is heavily republican and conservative. It's the opposite in liberal democrat leaning forums. Both are fascinating!

[Southflaguy]

When he leaves office...A lot of people on the left were down right disrespectful to Bush, now it's the people on the right's turn to dish out...

[Nikk]

When he leaves office...A lot of people on the left were down right disrespectful to Bush, now it's the people on the right's turn to dish out...

See I have always liked discussing the merits of the individuals actions of any President, with facts and stuff. But people find that exceedingly boring! lol

[BigPat]

The extreme partisans are going to hate Obama regardless of what he does, just as they did with CLinton, and just as the left wing partisans did with G. W. Bush. It's just politics as usual.

[Mstangfk]

sure wasnt much complaining about Bush..

[Kieth M.]

Obama lovers, Dems, and so-called progressives set the example of "respect for the office of the POTUS" for the last eight years....now they should feel free to accept the outcome of their lowering of the bar.

Simply put, it's a round world - what goes around, comes around.

[Till]

Why is it that every time I go look in the general topics forum, I don't look far before seeing a huge thread about the latest hate piece from Fox news about Obama, followed by post after post of hate for the Commander in Chief and those who support him? I just don't get it. This man is now the top dog in law enforcement. That's what the executive branch is all about, yet this ugly, hatefilled mindset takes over the ideology of the men and women of these forums, many of whom now in-directly work below him.

Yes, I voted for the man, and while I haven't fallen in love with everything he has done, for the most part, he hasn't really screwed up. Yes he spent a lot of money, but as they say, it takes money to make money, and a spending bill was the only feesible way out of the economic decline, at least in many people's thinking.

Not only this, but Obama has reached out on numerous occassions to Republicans for bi-partisanship, and was slapped down, with a resounding, "our way or the highway" from the GOP.

I don't like Democrats, they are full of themselves and treat conservatives like idiots. But Obama hasn't become a Pelosi, or a Olberman. He is still a man of ideals who reaches out for compromise. Why won't he see this back from people on the right? Even the people on this forum, who have little reason to dislike the man who has given taxbreaks and attemped to rescue the economy, still find it in their duty to berate and knock down the ruler of the free world, for little more reason than, "it's fun to hate."


LOL at the misguided, 19 y/o, idealistic, college student corrupted by a liberal education.

[mjhoyt27]

LOL at the misguided, 19 y/o, idealistic, college student corrupted by a liberal education.

I really couldn't figure out why you would attack someone for being in college. The first thing I did was see if you were from the deep south. That wasn't the case, then I read your profile and it became pretty clear to me.

[Southflaguy]

See I have always liked discussing the merits of the individuals actions of any President, with facts and stuff. But people find that exceedingly boring! lol

Who finds it boring?...You've made good points on pretty much all your posts...

The thing that gets me about Obama right now is GITMO...He wants to close it down, but doesn't really know what to do after that...Another thing leave the CIA alone, let them work...

Bush found out the hard way what terrorist are capable of...For 8 years he had to do what ever it took to make sure another 9/11 didn't happen...Obama I feel like has a Sept 10th 2001 mentality...It's scary...

I wish Obama the best...I hope he turns it around for the best, b/c that means it'll get better for me you and everyone else...

I'll give him this, he's a good father and I'm sure husband...

Again you're not boring Nikk...:);)

[Kieth M.]

I really couldn't figure out why you would attack someone for being in college. The first thing I did was see if you were from the deep south. That wasn't the case, then I read your profile and it became pretty clear to me.

Wow, do please, enlighten us all as to how you arrived at your well-informed opinion of Till, based upon his public profile. Then, please, move on and let the rest of us know where we stand on the mjhoyt scale of suitability to breathe air and occupy space in your world.

[Nikk]

Who finds it boring?...You've made good points on pretty much all your posts...

The thing that gets me about Obama right now is GITMO...He wants to close it down, but doesn't really know what to do after that...

See now that's an individual action we could talk about. I don't personally see it as Obama or Bush, but a situation that we haven't faced before and don't know quite how to deal with. Bush put them there with no plan what to ever do with them. In a "normal" war you release captives at the end of the war, which is usually a cease fire. In a "war on terror" you never really end, there is no "ceasefire", and I don't think it was thought through that you can't keep people held forever in a makeshift prison. Now Obama plans to shut it down with no plan what to do with them, that hasn't been thought through either (not yet, anyway.) The whole situation is nuts and scary. It's something I discuss a lot, but not in the context of who's currently in office but in the context of America in general and how we tend to handle (or mishandle) things we haven't faced before.



Again you're not boring Nikk...:);)

Aww thank you sweetie. :)

[LAschoolCop]

I really couldn't figure out why you would attack someone for being in college. The first thing I did was see if you were from the deep south. That wasn't the case, then I read your profile and it became pretty clear to me.

They attack because they are haters....MJ college isn't for everybody :D

[2Adam29]

Who finds it boring?...You've made good points on pretty much all your posts...

The thing that gets me about Obama right now is GITMO...He wants to close it down, but doesn't really know what to do after that...Another thing leave the CIA alone, let them work...

Bush found out the hard way what terrorist are capable of...For 8 years he had to do what ever it took to make sure another 9/11 didn't happen...Obama I feel like has a Sept 10th 2001 mentality...It's scary...

I wish Obama the best...I hope he turns it around for the best, b/c that means it'll get better for me you and everyone else...

I'll give him this, he's a good father and I'm sure husband...

Again you're not boring Nikk...:);)

see THIS is what I mean. This post expresses concern in Obama's capability to lead properly without attacking him or his supporters personally.

[Southflaguy]

See now that's an individual action we could talk about. I don't personally see it as Obama or Bush, but a situation that we haven't faced before and don't know quite how to deal with. Bush put them there with no plan what to ever do with them. In a "normal" war you release captives at the end of the war, which is usually a cease fire. In a "war on terror" you never really end, there is no "ceasefire", and I don't think it was thought through that you can't keep people held forever in a makeshift prison. Now Obama plans to shut it down with no plan what to do with them, that hasn't been thought through either (not yet, anyway.) The whole situation is nuts and scary. It's something I discuss a lot, but not in the context of who's currently in office but in the context of America in general and how we tend to handle (or mishandle) things we haven't faced before.





Aww thank you sweetie. :)

Yeah, but Obama is calling the shots now, so what he says goes, for the most part...

Like I said Bush saw what terrorist are capable of, he maybe figured he'd rather keep as many AQ fighters in GITMO or other locations (getting info about who they are and AQ/Taliban) then being in a cave somewhere planning to do more stuff...

God forbid, but if we get hit again like 9/11 do you think Obama will still have the same mind set as he does now?...

It's a damned if you do damned if you don't type situation...

[alpha1906]

Why is it that every time I go look in the general topics forum, I don't look far before seeing a huge thread about the latest hate piece from Fox news about Obama, followed by post after post of hate for the Commander in Chief and those who support him? I just don't get it. This man is now the top dog in law enforcement. That's what the executive branch is all about, yet this ugly, hatefilled mindset takes over the ideology of the men and women of these forums, many of whom now in-directly work below him.

Yes, I voted for the man, and while I haven't fallen in love with everything he has done, for the most part, he hasn't really screwed up. Yes he spent a lot of money, but as they say, it takes money to make money, and a spending bill was the only feesible way out of the economic decline, at least in many people's thinking.

Not only this, but Obama has reached out on numerous occassions to Republicans for bi-partisanship, and was slapped down, with a resounding, "our way or the highway" from the GOP.

I don't like Democrats, they are full of themselves and treat conservatives like idiots. But Obama hasn't become a Pelosi, or a Olberman. He is still a man of ideals who reaches out for compromise. Why won't he see this back from people on the right? Even the people on this forum, who have little reason to dislike the man who has given taxbreaks and attemped to rescue the economy, still find it in their duty to berate and knock down the ruler of the free world, for little more reason than, "it's fun to hate."

Most ofthe people thatvisit this site are cops or wannbees or military folks. Most (not all) of these kinds of folks are very ultra conservative. and nothing that a dempcrat does will ever be right intheir eyes. Its a stereotype and a pre judgement. Samethinghappens onthe other side of the ailse as well. people are caught up in titiles and positions no matter what the persons personal viesw are just for the mere fact that they are a Democrat, conservatives automatically despise them. Its crazy and immature if you ask me.

I am a Democrat. Does that mean I dont like any Republicans? no. I voted for G F Bush. I like the Gov of Florida. I like Colin Powell. I dont vote based on titles. I vote based on principles.

Once people start taking this attitude, we as a nation wil grow for the better.

[Till]

I really couldn't figure out why you would attack someone for being in college. The first thing I did was see if you were from the deep south. That wasn't the case, then I read your profile and it became pretty clear to me.

I applaud the guy for going to college, so it wasn't an attack.

Unfortunately I also think it's where this liberal, idealistic, bleeding heart, Obama-loving viewpoint could have came from.

Some need to start seeing the world the way it is, instead of the way it could be.

That wasn't the case, then I read your profile and it became pretty clear to me.


That's some pretty good intuition just from reading a profile.

[2Adam29]

I applaud the guy for going to college, so it wasn't an attack.

Unfortunately I also think it's where this liberal, idealistic, bleeding heart, Obama-loving viewpoint could have came from.

Some need to start seeing the world the way it is, instead of the way it could be.




That's some pretty good intuition just from reading a profile.

glad you approve of my attending college, but the reason I'm a democrat (and I'm only a moderate democrat) hs to do with the fact that my parents, (both of whom have college degrees and are still democrats in their late 40's) have strong values that rub off on me. We all are relatively conservative on social issues like abortion and the like. For the record, I'd rather push to make the world a better place than sit my entire life in a pointless complacency.

[-Erik-]

This is just kind of what happens. The right and left both feel that they have it pegged down on what is best for America. This is just the natural order of things. Right now the Liberals and Dems get to stick there nose out at the Conservatives and Republicans and say "Haha we have control and you dont so deal with it". Then when the right gets its shot they get to do the same thing.

That's how the world spins. Its not "what comes around goes around" its just the game of politics.

[tony.o]

yeah, because people in higher education can't possibly be informed voters. For the record, I learned about all presidential candidates and their stances on the issues before making my choice. I didn't just vote for and campaign for him because he was popular. I live in Nebraska. Democrats tend to be unpopular here.

Another Taylor. You two related?

[tony.o]

Most ofthe people thatvisit this site are cops or wannbees or military folks. .

Yeah, and some got hired, went through an academy and got run off shortly thereafter.:rolleyes:

[tony.o]

The extreme partisans are going to hate Obama regardless of what he does, just as they did with CLinton, and just as the left wing partisans did with G. W. Bush. It's just politics as usual.

What Obama is doing to our country isn't politics or business as usual.

[nuthead]

yeah, because people in higher education can't possibly be informed voters.

That's not his point. I'm in higher education and there's no way I would have voted for Obama. His point is more along the lines of a 19 year-old in college hasn't lived and worked long enough in the "real world" to see how things really are. I, too, was idealistic in my youth - but as I got older I saw how my idea of how things "should" be was really off. I believed that if you just gave people a chance and a break, why, they'd jump right up and become productive members of society. To make a long learning experience very short, I was WRONG. Sure, it sounds great to "spread the wealth" until you realize that the people you're giving the money to will only squander it and beg for more. After you take so much, you no longer have wealth, you have your hardworking people with no money (because you took it all) and the lazy people with no money (because they blew it all).

[1042 Trooper]

Even the people on this forum still find it in their duty to berate and knock down the ruler of the free world, for little more reason than, "it's fun to hate."

Ruler, huh? That explains you completely. Get out o' my tree. :mad:

[DaLAW]

I mean, Obama is getting the same hate/bashing Bush got except its from the Right now. I criticized Bush when I didn't agree but I didn't seek out reasons to just wail on him, but I know a lot of people that did. All that's happening now. That's how our country's political discourse usually is: riddled with arrogance and stubbornness...

[G22Dude]

I mean, Obama is getting the same hate/bashing Bush got except its from the Right now. I criticized Bush when I didn't agree but I didn't seek out reasons to just wail on him, but I know a lot of people that did. All that's happening now. That's how our country's political discourse usually is: riddled with arrogance and stubbornness...

You have to admit from a conservatives point of view he's done enough that you don't have to seek out a reason to wail on him. His supporters will most naturally agree with his actions thus far, but I would be surprised if the right was just going to be silent.

Its the nature of the game.

[FNA209]

someone please tell me what the hell republicans have done to reach out... all I've seen is republicans saying, "sure.. we'll vote for it... If its EXACTLY what we want." Rather than actually searching for compromise.



Maybe they are saying that because the compromise involves allowing a bill to pass that is a bad bill.

Naw- couldn't be that simple. I guess you're right. They're just doing it to be spiteful. :rolleyes:

[FNA209]

I would think the "they started it" mentality would be a little beneath grown adults who claim that the bush bashing means it is free reign for Obama bashing. I guess not.



I see it from a different angle. If it is indeed okay to be critical of a President (and it is as evidenced by the actions of some during the Bush years and as an established right of American citizens), why shouldn’t we be critical of Obama? Is he untouchable for some reason? I detect a “It’s not fair!” attitude.

I’m not saying it’s now a tit-for-tat situation as much as I’m saying that there exists a crowd who saw nothing wrong with denouncing Bush, but now that their messiah is in office, we shouldn’t say bad things about him, even if we object to his actions.



as far as the law enforcement thing goes. I guess I'm kind of basing it on principle... whatever, it's not that important.



What principle? Unless you have a reason to say what you said, it either means you still think you were right or you have a serious gap in your understanding of constitution. That makes it very important. If we as citizens don’t understand the constitution, our freedoms are not long for this world.



What do you propose to do to fix the economy? Last time we had a depression it was massive government spending that helped us climb out of it in the form of a war. (if memory serves) I don't see why we cant let the economy recover, then scale back and gradually move into a more financially stable plan. I know its been said many times before and all, but if the economy recovers quickly, we might just make a dent in the deficit before the next president comes into office.



Last time we had a depression… there are those who say the massive federal spending actually prolonged the depression. John Rockefeller, an American icon of industry of that period, said, “"These are days when many are discouraged. In the 93 years of my life, depressions have come and gone. Prosperity has always returned and will again." He was inferring the market and the economy would rebound and fix itself. It never had a chance because the government threw on a cape and attempted to fly to the rescue.

There are those that say all of the governmental interference and spending helped and those that say it actually prolonged the depression. I believe massive federal spending which involves money we don’t have is not the answer and only hurts us in the long run.

I look at a deficit spending policy to be like giving someone who has common cold arsenic as a cure. It can be argued when they die, the cold is no longer an issue. But it wasn’t exactly the best outcome.

The burden of “making a dent” in the massive deficit this stimulus is going to create will be done at the expensive of the workingman. That’s whom it will impact. Regardless of what taxes are created to pay back the debt, it will come out of your pocket. I only hope you get a good paying job when you graduate and don’t have a heavy student loan burden. You will pay much more (in taxes and goods) than I ever had to. Good luck with that.



I understand that people don't want big government. Obama has said he doesn't really want it either…



You know just because he says….

Here’s your lesson for the day-

Obama is a liar. He’s a politician. They all lie. There are few, if any, politicians who don’t talk out both sides of their mouths. If you find an honest one, do what you can to keep him in office because they are far and few between.

Class dismissed.

Obama is anti-small. He is creating a nanny state by increasing entitlement programs. He knows his way to power is through taking money from the productive and giving it to the unproductive. Money means votes. He also apparently doesn’t understand the concept of personal responsibility and wants us to pay for the follies committed by stupid people who overextended themselves. He is anti-self reliance. He (and a whole bunch of members in Congress) want all of us to be dependent on them. It’s a control thing. Free people who are allowed to spend their money as they see fit scares those folks in DC. After all, they think they know best how we should spend our money. That's why they take it away from us.



Of course you don't have to like him.



Gee, thanks for your permission. :p



Better yet, my original problem persists... Why do they talk about these things in the "general" forum when this is clearly the forum for political discussion?



I hate to play this card, but I guess I have to. It’s our forum! Many of the folks who play here are longtime participants. We like the forum being used the way it is used. If you want a heavily moderated forum, there are some out there. Seek them out. I’m sure you’ll be able to find one that suits your tastes.

[JK4629]

My buddy just started dating this 24 year old mother of 2, she was divorced at age 19 or 20 if that's not starting to paint a picture. Anyways, she's not the sharpest tool in the shed for other reasons then the already previously mentioned. She was preaching up and down the other day about how she voted for Obama. She states that Obama is going to take all the guns away so innocent kids don't accidentally grab daddy's gun in the bedroom and shoot themselves, and that Obama is going to help all the single moms of the world! She brags that she'll never have to "pay in" at tax time because she always gets an extra 6k or 7k at the end of the year. Yeah, she's a real piece of work! These are pretty typical responses I get from people who voted for him around here between 18 and 25. All these people wanting something for nothing, and think he's a living god!

I love voters like this and especially love footing the bill for irresponsible parents.

When will the Obama bashing stop? Never when people who voted for him argue their points like my buddy's gf did. If only McCain would have won.....:(

[Outshined]

Bad press, including major mockery of the plan by comedian Jon Stewart,

led to President Obama abandoning his proposal to require veterans carry private health insurance to cover the estimated $540 million annual cost to the federal government of treatment for injuries to military personnel received during their tours on active duty.

The President admitted that he was puzzled by the magnitude of the

opposition to his proposal.

"Look, it's an all volunteer force," Obama complained..

"Nobody made these guys go to war. They had to have known and accepted the risks. Now they whine about bearing the costs of their choice? It doesn't compute.."

"I thought these were people who were proud to sacrifice for their

country," Obama continued. "I wasn't asking for blood, just money. With the country facing the worst financial crisis in its history, I'd have

thought that the patriotic thing to do would be to try to help reduce the nation's deficit. I guess I underestimated the selfishness of some of my fellow Americans."

[JasperST]

lol. I know... seems a bit lofty to hope that repubs can respect the president, but hey! I'm an idealist! ;)LOL, college student huh? Funny that I don't remember that attitude from the Dims about the prior president. Or any Republican for that matter. You don't have a higher education because you stepped foot onto a college campus and you may well leave knowing no more about politics than you do now.

Obama was voted in as a president, not to act like a wealthy philanthropist with ours and our future generation's money. Nor to grow government faster than anyone. And you don't like to see criticism? Grow up.

[Highwaylaw]

"She states that Obama is going to take all the guns away so innocent kids don't accidentally grab daddy's gun in the bedroom and shoot themselves"

But her kids have no daddy , so she's got nothing to worry about.....

[Jellybean400]

Two words: sore losers ;) :)

[Outshined]

Two words, "sad losers"



"Nobody made these guys go to war. They had to have known and accepted the risks. Now they whine about bearing the costs of their choice? It doesn't compute.."

[JasperST]

"She states that Obama is going to take all the guns away so innocent kids don't accidentally grab daddy's gun in the bedroom and shoot themselves"

But her kids have no daddy , so she's got nothing to worry about.....:D:D:D

[Nikk]

Bad press, including major mockery of the plan by comedian Jon Stewart,

led to President Obama abandoning his proposal to require veterans carry private health insurance to cover the estimated $540 million annual cost to the federal government of treatment for injuries to military personnel received during their tours on active duty.

The President admitted that he was puzzled by the magnitude of the

opposition to his proposal.

"Look, it's an all volunteer force," Obama complained..

"Nobody made these guys go to war. They had to have known and accepted the risks. Now they whine about bearing the costs of their choice? It doesn't compute.."

"I thought these were people who were proud to sacrifice for their

country," Obama continued. "I wasn't asking for blood, just money. With the country facing the worst financial crisis in its history, I'd have

thought that the patriotic thing to do would be to try to help reduce the nation's deficit. I guess I underestimated the selfishness of some of my fellow Americans."


I'm sure you know this, but in case some read it seriously Obama never said those "quotes" (it's from a satire, they're all made up), nor does it accurately represent the budget proposal it's discussing (which was just one of many ideas discussed with vets at a meeting, not an official proposal). It would not have required veterans to carry private health care nor would it have any financial impact on any veterans. But it's a good example of the type of thing where misinterpretations and/or misinformation causes reactions.

[Lox]

"When does the Obama bashing stop?"

When we are all programed robots.

[Taylor13]

When your professor tells you Obama is bad. This thread must be a joke.

Taylor

[Firebug]

I'm not defending what people said about bush, and I get that Obama is a public figure, but it just seems like people love to throw hate around on this forum. Can't you disagree without being disagreeable? Say, "I think that plan will run us into the ground" rather than "Barack Osama is a POS who hates our country!"

I think anyone with half a brain can see that Obama loves his country, even if you disagree with his method of attempting to rescue it.


I can't see that he loves his country when he refused to put his hand on his heart during the National Anthem or even wear an American flag pin on his lapel during the campain.

fb

[lisah]

I can't see that he loves his country when he refused to put his hand on his heart during the National Anthem or even wear an American flag pin on his lapel during the campain.

fb

You are talking about that one picture, right? Without context, it's hard to justify saying he refused to do so. This link show him with his hand on his heart.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/anthem.asp

I thought his take on the flag pin was interesting. When he quit wearing it after 9/11, he talked about his feeling that such things can take the place of real patriotism. And he did wear the pin again during the campaign.

[DOAcop38]

+1.

Hate hate hate. I love the use of that buzzword for everything conservative people have to say in protest of people who are literally ruining America as we know it. It seems to me that all the hate is coming from the left, they hate America, hate God, and hate the military. They hate people who try to protect the unborn, they hate wealthy capitalists who create jobs, they hate the police. They are the ones taking crosses off war memorials, the 10 commandments off the courthouse and the manger scene off the town hall lawn.

No- what "we" libs hate is HYPOCRISY !!!Conservatives have this sick sense of "Americana" that is made for only a small slice of the population in this country,and have no problem fomenting racial bias, sexual discrimination, and religious superiority.They rant and chant "Freedom" UNTIL its "for the other guy". They claim to "love america" YET support everything that destroys it( shipping of jobs overseas,limitation the power of the poor working man to stand up to the rich, worship of GREEDY capitalist and industrialists, limitations of freedom of speech ,and freedom to DISSENT)


Being an "american" is NOT a slogan or rally cry of rhetoric. Its the right to "life, liberty ,and the pursuit of happiness" NOT dictated by a corporation or a jack legged minister who twists the biblical statutes to suit his drone like followers into HATING anything they are scared off( book burning is for the simple minded, and advocating nuclear strikes against people of different religions is NOT what Christ had in mind when he said to "love thy neighbor")


I personally feel that Hussein and people like him hate me and what I believe in, and wish to take from me and restrict me, even though the values I hold dear have nothing to do with hating, hurting or depriving anyone.

So as long as Hussein is on his little crusade to "change" America and become a dictator, and as long as we still have the freedom to do so, we will try to counter with truth.

Well, like it or not, "Hussein" is NOT going to become a dictator,much less destroy what you believe in.Part of being an " American" is ACCEPTING the believe that someone else doesn't have to like or think the way you do,or vice versa.You put up with 8 yrs of a man who did NOTHING for you( he didn't "Stop" abortion, didn't "stop" people from worshipping anyone BUT Jesus, impeded on your rights by pushing B.S. like "der patriot akt", allowed torture on U.S. territory,and violations of the 5th and 6th amendment - a prelude to potential taking away those rights from "real americans" ( of which folks like you don't seem to think that Barack,or people who look like him or support him , ARE...)


"I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say, we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration." -Hillary Clinton

Funny... You would even quote a die hard, graying Feminist liberal woman ,whose believes and policies are even MORE left than Obama's.When it initially looked like she would be the shoe in to assault the reactionary right in this nation, folks here on this sight put up the most hateful comments and opinions about here( some repeatedly called her a "witch", just so they could get past the censorship if they tried to use the "b" word)

whats being posted is not "debate and disagreement, but distaste, veiled racism, and flat out ignorant conspiracy theories becuase some here feel the man doesn't look, or think like what their narrow views of what an "american president" should look or act like. I was one who waited 8 YRS for Bush Jr to at least act like his Dad or Reagan, and he didn't. His administration left this nation in the GUTTER financially,left us paranoid,and despised around the world.

They left MILLIONS of Americans( the ones you like and don't) in the lurch, and all people here can rant about is how Obama is going to take away guns( wheres the big round up? hasn't started and WON'T),or let some gay folks get married( personally don't believe its right, but the constitution ,under the 10 th amendment ,allows for the states to decide if its ok), or wants a "universal health plan"- do any of you really KNOW what "Socialism" is ?? its NOT totalitarianism as was practiced in the former USSR! (doubtful,because if if you did, you'd probably accept it over this sorry excuse for capitalism we have right now, and this country is probably the ONLY country in the world that could pull off "true" socialism and make it work for the good of everyone !)

your hate ( not "disagreement"),as well as many others, is childish! "when" Obama screws up, bash him!But right now, with barely 4 months in office, how can you hold him to standard you didn't even demand from the recent former holder of the Whitehouse for 8 yrs???...................

[DOAcop38]

"When does the Obama bashing stop?"

When we are all programed robots.

...or wage slaves without the right to say anything against it( seems the republicans REALLY took care of Michigan before Obama came into office ,huh? ) enjoy seing your neighbors working for Hyundai or Dae Woo,cause the CEOs of the "big three" have gotten theirs ( as well as their Neocon masters)..............

Nope, no need to be "programmed", it was already done with a "country twang" coming from a "made in china" guitar ,and some bozo yodelling about free'dum when he can't find a job cause its been outsourced....

[LAschoolCop]

Gotta love DOA's posts!! Thank you sir :) Well said

[LeanG]

Bad press, including major mockery of the plan by comedian Jon Stewart,

led to President Obama abandoning his proposal to require veterans carry private health insurance to cover the estimated $540 million annual cost to the federal government of treatment for injuries to military personnel received during their tours on active duty.

The President admitted that he was puzzled by the magnitude of the

opposition to his proposal.

"Look, it's an all volunteer force," Obama complained..

"Nobody made these guys go to war. They had to have known and accepted the risks. Now they whine about bearing the costs of their choice? It doesn't compute.."

"I thought these were people who were proud to sacrifice for their

country," Obama continued. "I wasn't asking for blood, just money. With the country facing the worst financial crisis in its history, I'd have

thought that the patriotic thing to do would be to try to help reduce the nation's deficit. I guess I underestimated the selfishness of some of my fellow Americans."

Citation please.....Or did you get it from the "jokes" forum :confused:

[LeanG]

When does the Obama bashing stop?

When we get rid of 24hr news with biased political commentators and live, on air op-ed pieces delivered by individuals who claim that they're bringing us the news. We have individuals who claim that the news is biased because it doesn't cater to "our" own political beliefs. So what is "our" response? Whenever we grow weak, we quickly run to the nearest *insert bias news source here* and recharge with the same crappy editorials and commentating that reinforces our beliefs.

Oh yeah, 24 hour news is the best.

[2Adam29]

For crying out loud! I'm not saying you got to love the man! I don't want people to even agree with his policies, debate and discussion on public policy is as american as apple pie! I'm saying, lets work together and keep personal attacks out of it.You can say hes running the country into the ground, and how hes burdening the country with massive debt. I GET IT. But he's not EVIL. He just has different ideas of how to improve the coutry.

[Monty Ealerman]

Who finds it boring?...You've made good points on pretty much all your posts...

The thing that gets me about Obama right now is GITMO...He wants to close it down, but doesn't really know what to do after that...Another thing leave the CIA alone, let them work...

Bush found out the hard way what terrorist are capable of...For 8 years he had to do what ever it took to make sure another 9/11 didn't happen...Obama I feel like has a Sept 10th 2001 mentality...It's scary...

I wish Obama the best...I hope he turns it around for the best, b/c that means it'll get better for me you and everyone else...

I'll give him this, he's a good father and I'm sure husband...

Again you're not boring Nikk...:);)(emphasis added)

Maybe Michelle will continue to be cordial about whether he's a good husband, now that she gets to redecorate the White House.

Even so, I wonder what expression would cross her brow if someone were to ask her why was Vera Baker banished to Martinique.

"It gets kinda rough in the back of my limousine." (Prince)

[Monty Ealerman]

When is the rampant slaughter of innocent not-yet-born children going to stop?

Why is the University of Notre Dame about to give this counterfeit president an honorary degree?

I'll probably stop denouncing that man when I'm dead.

[Monty Ealerman]

Let's all have some more pabulum?

[JK4629]

When is the rampant slaughter of innocent not-yet-born children going to stop?

Why is the University of Notre Dame about to give this counterfeit president an honorary degree?

I'll probably stop denouncing that man when I'm dead.


Don't lie Monty, you know you'll continue denouncing him in the afterlife! :D

[Southflaguy]

When is the rampant slaughter of innocent not-yet-born children going to stop?

Why is the University of Notre Dame about to give this counterfeit president an honorary degree?

I'll probably stop denouncing that man when I'm dead.

Monty, I didn't think you were an "Obama basher"...LOL...You're always the voice of reason/conscience...

You forgot another thing, how come teams that win championships give him a jersey, he's not in the team...:D;):D


Regards,

SFG...;):D

[Monty Ealerman]

Monty, I didn't think you were an "Obama basher"...LOL...You're always the voice of reason/conscience...Well thanks for that commendation, SFG, but I've also been quite persistent in my denunciation of Barry. Here's an example of that ( from http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1610593 ) :

I didn't wait until after the election or inauguration to denounce Obama as a bad guy, just like he didn't wait 'til then to start being one -- here's some stuff from some of my past posts:
...
Are you kidding? No connection? That's ludicrous.

Senator Obama is connected to all these guys. Rezko financed all of Obama's campaigns. Obama's house is a stone's throw from Rezko's, and they used to have lunch together there about weekly. Rezko got Obama his mortgage loan from a Panamanian money-laundering bank. Obama signed a recommendation letter so that Rezko could get Aiham Al Samarrie to be given the $50M security contract for the electrical grid in Iraq. Aiham stole the money and is now living in Oak Lawn, a Chicago suburb. Blackwater broke Aiham out of an Iraq prison and he was given fake documents to get into the US. Somebody had to have paid. Presumably the money came from the $50M.

Obama got a huge amount of money in wired contributions that aren't subject to the same reporting requirements and source verifiabilty as most other contributions are. His mistress Vera Baker is still sitting in Martinique at least until after the inauguration because his wife Michelle is mad about the affair.

Vera drew a salary as Obama's "Finance Director" even though she has no qualifications for the job, and even though Obama identified someone else as having that job. Vera helped get him money for his media surge right before the election from some mobsters via Caribbean money-launderers.

Michelle likes the White House too much to get loud about the affair.

Senator Obama hangs around with Syrian mobsters in St. Louis. He's as deeply corrupt as any other Chicago politician.

He's more connected than a CNS neuron.

Let's look at some connections:

1. Aiham Al Sammarie was Tony Rezko's pal when they were at IIT in Chicago, where they studied nuclear electrical engineering.

2. Aiham was a mid-level Baathist under Sadaam Hussein.

3. Aiham was Minister of the Interior for Electricity in Iraq.

4. Aiham was awarded a $50 million security contract for the electrical grid in Iraq. The contract was brokered by his old pal Rezko, who was supported in that effort by Senator Barack Obama who signed a letter of recommendation for Aiham.

5. Aiham had a direct contract with Sunni insurgents and Al Queda operatives attempting to regulate electric service prices.

6. Aiham twice was broken out of Iraqi prison by Blackwater, a private contractor, so who paid? We did. The $50 million in US funds was stolen by Aiham. That's why the Iraquis locked him up. That's where the funds to pay to break him out came from.

7. Aiham bailed Rezko out of federal custody.

8. So where is Aiham now? He's in Oakbrook Terrace (a Chicago suburb) in a $1.5 - $2 million house, with an active Interpol warrant, and no effort being made to accomodate Iraq's requests for extradition.

9. Nodhi Auchi, #2 Baathist, pronunced persona non grata by the US department of State, gets a $150-$200 million land deal in Chicago's West Loop.

10. Auchi arranges for a loan through a front company in Panama for a loan to Obama for Obama's personal real estate property located near that of Rezko.

11. Obama says he does not "recall" meeting Auchi at Rezko's home.

12. Sami Al Arian, a Professor at the University of Chicago, has a daughter who works for Michelle Obama. He is the North American leader for Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

13. Abdul Rahman is an associate of Sami who left Chicago after 9/11. They're both affiliated with the Council for the Leadership of Palestine, another militant group.

14. Obama is an associate of Rabbith Haddad who was convicted and expelled.

15. The only ones of Obama's shady and worse-than-shady associates he's been given any significant media scrutiny over are Rezko, William Ayers, and the Fannie Mae looter Raines that he hired, and for some reason he's pretty much being given a pass on all of them.

16. Reverend Wright is a close associate of Reverend Louis Farrakhan , and of Rezko's father, as well as being a close associate of Obama.

17. Rezko is of Syrian descent, and has close ties with Syrian outfit guys in Chicago and St. Louis, as well as having been financer of ALL Obama's campaigns.

Does anyone think he could go through a Police or Military Background Investigation with this dirty laundry list of associates and emerge with ANY kind of security clearance?

Obama has yet to adequately explain ANY of it. Why? Because he can't do that without admitting to being a smug smiling America-hating criminal.

I didn't mention the Governor, The Mayor, or the Senator's mistress in that post.

... maybe look up, for example, the cyber-payments from St. Lucia, near Martinique, where Vera Baker is staying now.

I looked up and plagiarized and redacted some stuff ... :

Khalid bin Mahfouz is a Saudi Arabian billionaire Al Quada contributor and Obama campaign contributor who lives in Dublin and keeps an apartment for his boyfriend (more on him later) in London and is connected to mobsters in Ireland and to Irish-ancestry and Arab-ancestry mobsters and terrorists in Chicago and elsewhere.

The list goes on.

Obama's campaign received contributions from India mobsters located in Trinidad.

FEC Senate campaign records show that Vera Baker was paid a salary as Obama's “Finance Director” in 2004. But Claire Serdiuk was listed as Obama’s Finance Director for his 2004 Senate campaign, and was paid a salary for her work in that capacity. Later Vera Baker relocated to New York.

Vera Baker had a business in Washington raising campaign funds. She was a partner of Muthoni Wambu, in Baker Wambu & Associates, a political fund-raising firm. Wambu also worked for Senator Biden.

The Obama campaign's last-minute media surge was largely funded by Mafouz and other bad guys using money laundered via front companies and untraceable foreign channels and cyber-payments. Baker and Wambu helped with the arrangements.

Cherif Sedky is logged as a contributor to the Obama campaign but only for token amounts of money.

He's a lawyer and media consultant for Khalid Bin Mahfouz.

Mahfouz was involved in the BCCI scandal which brought high finance into terrorist financing, the sale of nuclear technology to rogue regimes, and illegal immigration.

He has a wife and 3 children, but still has a side thing going with a young man he keeps in apartment in London. That man has the alias Khalid Ganzal. His "real name" is Chinua "Charley" Wambu. He's the half-brother of Muthoni Wambu, Vera Baker's business partner.

Oh and let's not forget that Obama's Mom and both of her parents registered as members of CPUSA (Communist Party). And Obama's "mentor" Frank Marshall Davis that he reminisces about in his book is also a CPUSA member. One might want to consider what Senator Obama might mean when he talks about "change", and redistribution of wealth, and all that stuff. ...


Why doesn't Hawaii cough up the basis for its issuance of a Certificate of Live Birth, and why doesn't Senator Obama do that if it won't? Why doesn't Senator Obama say why he won't produce a real orginal Birth Certificate, with footprints, and everything? Why doesn't Senator Obama provide reasonable answers to the questions about his natural-born status, and instead provide only inadequate responses, and pretend that those responses are sufficient?

...
So his ethnicity makes him exempt from ordinary eligibility proof requirements? I don't think so. He should provide the original documention regarding his birth, or a reasonable explanation as to why he can't or won't, and do the best he can to get Hawaii to show its basis for issuing the Certificate of Live Birth the campaign has proffered, and stop insulting the People by pretending that the scanned CLB alone should be regarded as sufficient to establish his eligibility, and should stop avoiding properly answering questions about his eligibility.
... factcheck ... They aren't always pro-Obama, but they are run by Annenberg, and Senator Obama was Chairman of the Board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was part of the Annenberg Foundation. I think they throw a little stuff against Senator Obama out there in order to maintain some semblance of credibility, but are in general soft on him and in general try to be hard on Senator McCain. The Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania owns factcheck, and factcheck says at the bottom of its pages that the organization that owns them isn't responsible for their content. I wonder just how factual that is.
I didn't contradict myself. I pointed out the Annenberg connections regarding Senator Obama and factcheck and I acknowledged that factcheck asserts that Annenberg doesn't control its content. I think it's almost impossible for a media organization to be oblivious regarding its funding.
Franklin Raines, Tim Howard, and Jim Johnson all used to work for Fannie Mae, all had multi-million-dollar golden parachutes, and all now work for Senator Obama.
Obama is legitimately associable with criminals, racists, anti-america adherents, Middle Eastern terrorism funders, al queda money launderers, Chicago political corruption, all due to choices he himself made.
Senator Obama did go to the Middle East, and did fraternize with terrorists, and did broker a deal enabling the stealing of tens of millions of US taxpayer dollars, and did help people to launder money for terrorist organizations, and did get 5 of his campaigns financed by a man who's now a federal convict. Senator McCain didn't do any of the things contemplated in the fictional work mentioned, and everyone rational knows he never will. The two contentions are not comparable; the first is true; only the second is ludicrous.
I wonder what will happen when his multi-hundred-million dollar payoffs to the media have run their course, and the honeymoon is over, and they start looking for new stories.
And the rest of that post from you:

You forgot another thing, how come teams that win championships give him a jersey, he's not in the team...:D;):DYes, you don't have to be a Roman Catholic scholar to get an honorary degree from the University of Notre Dame du Lac, any more than you have to be able to skate to get an honorary hockey puck, but if you were a hockey fan, would you give an honorary puck to someone whose hobby was salting ice rinks?

The honorary Doctor of Laws degree is supposed to be bestowed upon persons who exemplify ideals with which the Unversity is consanguine, and should not be given to persons who are completely inimical to those ideals in such an important matter, and Barry is such a person.

I call him Barry because, like many other criminals, he keeps changing his name: Barry Dunham, Barry Soetero, Barry Obama, Barack Obama, Barack Hussein Obama. I used to call him Senator Obama. Now I mainly just call him Barry.

How can Notre Dame claim to be pro-life, anti-abortion, and a Catholic Church institution, and then award an honorary degree to a person who is avowedly in favor of the slaughter of millions of not-yet-born children?

As a member of the Notre Dame family, I am deeply ashamed.

Regards,

Monty

[Southflaguy]

I see, Monty...LOL...I'm guessing you didn't vote for your hometown politician...:D


Intresting ties to Obama...

I'm not into hockey...Baseball and football are my favorite sports, and yes I'd give anyone a bat or football if they wanted, seriously I would...

[Monty Ealerman]

Would you give the President of the Louisville Slugger firm an award at a tree-hugger rally, or invite Rawlings guys to be honorees and toss out pigskins to the crowd at a vegan rally?

[JasperST]

I'm not into hockey...Baseball and football are my favorite sports, and yes I'd give anyone a bat or football if they wanted, seriously I would...That's great. And just hand the bill over to some working stiff, or their kids, or kid's kids. Then the media will swoon over how generous you are. But you need to be good with a teleprompter to get away with it.

[Southflaguy]

Well I was just playing about that comment of giving him a jersey...It's tradition...If you win the Super Bowl, World Series, whatever championship you go meet the president and give him a jersey...It's just tradition...I don't know about giving him a Louisville Slugger at tree-hugger meeting...

[LAschoolCop]

For crying out loud! I'm not saying you got to love the man! I don't want people to even agree with his policies, debate and discussion on public policy is as american as apple pie! I'm saying, lets work together and keep personal attacks out of it.You can say hes running the country into the ground, and how hes burdening the country with massive debt. I GET IT. But he's not EVIL. He just has different ideas of how to improve the coutry.

Adam its hard for them people to not personally attack....maybe its in the water :D:D

[Southflaguy]

That's great. And just hand the bill over to some working stiff, or their kids, or kid's kids. Then the media will swoon over how generous you are. But you need to be good with a teleprompter to get away with it.

How, if the team is the one who buys the Jersey and gives it to the president?...

[Monty Ealerman]

I see, Monty...LOL...I'm guessing you didn't vote for your hometown politician...:DI voted 4 times for Senator John McCain. When he ran the first time, and he didn't win the Republican nomination over Governor George W. Bush, I wrote him in. I think he's an honorable and admirable man.

[Monty Ealerman]

Well I was just playing about that comment of giving him a jersey...It's tradition...If you win the Super Bowl, World Series, whatever championship you go meet the president and give him a jersey...It's just tradition...I don't know about giving him a Louisville Slugger at tree-hugger meeting...I was suggesting that it might be inappropriate for a tree-hugger group to give an award to the CEO of a tree-using firm, in order to illustrate why I think it's inappropriate for an anti-abortion institution such as the University of Notre Dame to give an honorary degree to a pro-abortion guy like Barry. I don't care about sports teams giving a public figure a friendly gift. I do think a Church institution should not give its apparent approval to someone who is so strongly in opposition with it in a matter of such vital importance.

[vacop4274]

Why is it that every time I go look in the general topics forum, I don't look far before seeing a huge thread about the latest hate piece from Fox news about Obama, followed by post after post of hate for the Commander in Chief and those who support him? I just don't get it. This man is now the top dog in law enforcement. That's what the executive branch is all about, yet this ugly, hatefilled mindset takes over the ideology of the men and women of these forums, many of whom now in-directly work below him.

Yes, I voted for the man, and while I haven't fallen in love with everything he has done, for the most part, he hasn't really screwed up. Yes he spent a lot of money, but as they say, it takes money to make money, and a spending bill was the only feesible way out of the economic decline, at least in many people's thinking.

Not only this, but Obama has reached out on numerous occassions to Republicans for bi-partisanship, and was slapped down, with a resounding, "our way or the highway" from the GOP.

I don't like Democrats, they are full of themselves and treat conservatives like idiots. But Obama hasn't become a Pelosi, or a Olberman. He is still a man of ideals who reaches out for compromise. Why won't he see this back from people on the right? Even the people on this forum, who have little reason to dislike the man who has given taxbreaks and attemped to rescue the economy, still find it in their duty to berate and knock down the ruler of the free world, for little more reason than, "it's fun to hate."

I would ask why was it ok for people to, and actually, to still bash G. W. Bush, call him evil etc, but not for anyone to have an opposing view when it comes to Obama???? Sounds like a double standard.

[Taylor13]

My friend Frankie, I've got all the proof and creds you need, lives in Chicago, IL he was INJURED IN IRAQ by an EFP (similar to an IED) and lost both of his legs he needed to be put in Walter Reed Medical for proper care. OBAMA IGNORED AND DENIED HIM PROPER ENTRANCE TO WALTER REED MEDICAL CENTER because the messiah was out campaigning.

[JasperST]

How, if the team is the one who buys the Jersey and gives it to the president?...It was a metaphor.

[DaLAW]

When is the rampant slaughter of innocent not-yet-born children going to stop?

Why is the University of Notre Dame about to give this counterfeit president an honorary degree?

I'll probably stop denouncing that man when I'm dead.

My thing is...how are you going to critique a person as a bad President based on his abortion-views? It's one thing to simply disagree with someone, but to assume they are an incompetent politician or 'counterfeit' because they have a different opinion? Is that even an attitude one *should* have when they live in a Democracy?

[DaLAW]

I would ask why was it ok for people to, and actually, to still bash G. W. Bush, call him evil etc, but not for anyone to have an opposing view when it comes to Obama???? Sounds like a double standard.

Bush served for 8 years. Obama has been in office for, what, not even 8 months? I don't see how the levels of *hatred* can even be the same. Hate him or love him, I personally don't think he's amassed a large enough body of work for people to feel strongly on either side of the equation. Nope, he's not a messiah. Most voters never said he was, that was some fanatical-right degredation of the intelligence of people voting for him. But likewise, Obama also is not the next Hitler, the next Castro, the next whoever his extremist opponents are saying he is...

[Taylor13]

DaLaw, Peggie Joseph doesn't agree with you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI

[Southflaguy]

I was suggesting that it might be inappropriate for a tree-hugger group to give an award to the CEO of a tree-using firm, in order to illustrate why I think it's inappropriate for an anti-abortion institution such as the University of Notre Dame to give an honorary degree to a pro-abortion guy like Barry. I don't care about sports teams giving a public figure a friendly gift. I do think a Church institution should not give its apparent approval to someone who is so strongly in opposition with it in a matter of such vital importance.

It's intresting Arizona didn't give him a degree...I don't know why they give people "honorary degrees"...If they earned it like everyone else fine, if not why give them one?...I'm not just saying Obama, but other people as well...

[Taylor13]

My moms friends dad got an honorary degree for donating like 10,000 to the college lol. He's now a Dr.

[DaLAW]

DaLaw, Peggie Joseph doesn't agree with you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI

I'm glad you brought that up;

1) I think that's one of the most over-blown, purposely misused clips in the history of campaigning. Well, besides the whole Swiftboat of 2004 scandal which the Republican set up to discredit Kerry...which turned out to be complete and utter bulls***...

Why? Do you truly, honestly believe this woman thought the President would personally *pay* for her gas? Or her mortgage payment? Do you honestly and truly think this woman believed Obama would establish some sort of fund to do that? Of course not. No rational person would. What she was saying was that unlike the current and ongoing situation at the time - the mortgage crisis, houses being foreclosed, gas pricing rising - the Obama administration would step in and, with their new policies, bring "Change" that would improve the country. What's so outrageous or foolish about that? Nothing. But, as stated...people purposely misused it on a literal sense to discredit Obama voters...

2) As stated before, if we wanted to play tic-for-tat, I could post all the youtube videos of the finest variety of trailer-park citizens bashing "that Muslim fella'!", "that negro boy!", etc, etc in order to prove all McCain voters are racist and just didn't want a Black President. Of course I wouldn't do that because its not true and you can't judge a base by a select few idiots...

[DaLAW]

It's intresting Arizona didn't give him a degree...I don't know why they give people "honorary degrees"...If they earned it like everyone else fine, if not why give them one?...I'm not just saying Obama, but other people as well...

That's what colleges and universities do. Bill Cosby has some, most politicians have them, random other comedians and actors have them, etc. Which is why its so funny that the sitting President wasn't deemed worthy just yet...

[DOAcop38]

For crying out loud! I'm not saying you got to love the man! I don't want people to even agree with his policies, debate and discussion on public policy is as american as apple pie! I'm saying, lets work together and keep personal attacks out of it.You can say hes running the country into the ground, and how hes burdening the country with massive debt. I GET IT. But he's not EVIL. He just has different ideas of how to improve the coutry.

Thank you! we shouldn't "love" any of our political leaders! Respect them? "Yes"- until they do something wrong or despicable, and then we hold them accountable. all thats been said is that he's a "secret" muslim, he's not a real citizen,he's anti christian ( or the anti christ) and every other "burgie beer" swilled conspiracy theory under the sun. I didn't like bush because he didn't have a National policy , not because he was a conservative( quite simple, i don't believe in most of the so-called conservative doctrine ,so I simply didn't vote for him). I grew to loathe him becuase he allowed an unneccessary war against a country that has never threatened our national safety ,to continue.

I ( unlike a lot here) didn't complain about his name, or his family,or his religious beliefs( where does it say you have to be a Christian ,or even believe in God to run a SECULAR nation?????). If McCain had of gotten the nod, and he would have done most of the same thing economy wise(at least 70% of it) that Obama is doing, you wouldn't hear a bitter, foaming peep out of the "real" Americans here.

Good take ,2Adam29! IF "osama Obama" screws the poach,he'll get voted out in 3 yrs,9 months, and RIGHTFULLY SO !.......

[DOAcop38]

You have to admit from a conservatives point of view he's done enough that you don't have to seek out a reason to wail on him. His supporters will most naturally agree with his actions thus far, but I would be surprised if the right was just going to be silent.

Its the nature of the game.

"WHAT" has he "done"??????... tried to get a policy and $$$ out there to keep our country from suffering a 2nd GREAT depression???

[Southflaguy]

My moms friends dad got an honorary degree for donating like 10,000 to the college lol. He's now a Dr.

I think they could have done something else to thank him for donating money...


That's what colleges and universities do. Bill Cosby has some, most politicians have them, random other comedians and actors have them, etc. Which is why its so funny that the sitting President wasn't deemed worthy just yet...

It's tacky though...You have people who worked their butt off to get the degree, and they just give it to someone just b/c they'r so and so...

[DaLAW]

I think they could have done something else to thank him for donating money...




It's tacky though...You have people who worked their butt off to get the degree, and they just give it to someone just b/c they'r so and so...

There's a lot of things that *should* be overhauled in the college system, but that's another thread. But hey, as long as we have Affirmative Action and Legacy Admissions, among other programs, honorary degree's might as well be given out too...

[Jellybean400]

For crying out loud! I'm not saying you got to love the man! I don't want people to even agree with his policies, debate and discussion on public policy is as american as apple pie! I'm saying, lets work together and keep personal attacks out of it.

Not gonna happen on this site. Not nowadays.

I disliked Bush for probably 5 years. But i personally didnt bash him within his first 100 days. Or first 5 days - as people on here did with Obama.

I know why most do... but i'll keep it to myself.

[PS100]

2adam29...you are a 19 year old college student. There is a Mark Twain quote that goes something like this:
"When I was a young man, I was amazed at how little my father knew. By the time I reached that age myself, I was amazed at how much he'd learned."

I cant' speak for anyone but me, and all I can tell you is that I find it reprehensible that the President of the United States is travelling the globe apologizing for America, nearly kissing the feet of the Saudi king, handing out dvd's and ipods to heads of state and dignitaries, laughing it up with Hugo Chavez,etc.
All this as he cuts the defense budget, shuts down GITMO, handcuffs the CIA, CUTS BENEFITS FOR FAMILIES OF COPS KILLED IN THE LINE OF DUTY, waits 5 days to take action as an american vessel is hijacked, embraces abortion and infanticide, fires the ceo of a PRIVATE company, wastes nearly 400k on a photo op for AirForce One that terrorizes Manhattan island, hires a guy who can't do his OWN taxes as treasurey secretary, nominates a handful of other folks that have to back out for similar reasons, and saddles my kids and grandkids with a debt that they will never be able to get out from under.
You do have to spend money to make money. There is a tremendous difference however, between "spending" and "handing out".

There have not been nor will there be any cuts in the benefits for families of cops killed in the line of duty...you should actually try to read thoroughly on the subject before making absurd statements like that.

[M-11]

I know why most do... but i'll keep it to myself.

Coming off as a bit smug JB.

I'll tell you why people have a problem with Obama. He's in charge of an establishment with a lot of socially/economically disenfranchised members. Americans are highly adept at blaming all their problems on others, and the guy steering the boat will always have dissention from the rowers.

He took a tough job, at a tough time. He made some tall promices and while he might struggle to keep them, reality is he is human, and will stumble on occasion.

M-11

[Monty Ealerman]

My thing is...how are you going to critique a person as a bad President based on his abortion-views? ...I criticize him him as a bad PERSON due to what you call his "abortion-views". His views have an enormous amount of influence. I think it's mass infanticide.

It's one thing to simply disagree with someone, but to assume they are an incompetent politician ...I didn't call him an an incompetent politician.
or 'counterfeit' because they have a different opinion?
I call Barry counterfeit not because of his having an opinoin different from mine, but because he, whichever alias he's using today, is probably not eligible to be President.

Is that even an attitude one *should* have when they live in a Democracy?You get to have your attitude, and I get to have mine, but Barry doesn't want to do anything to ensure that all the not-yet-born children someday get to fully express theirs.

I was criticizing my school for announcing that it intended to bestow a degree upon Barry honoris causa.

Given the gravity of the abortion matter, and the severity, extremity, and persistence of his opposition to the position of the Church regarding it, I think a Church-sponsored institution such as Notre Dame should not single him out for bestowal of any of its special honors.

[dadyswat]

Why? Do you truly, honestly believe this woman thought the President would personally *pay* for her gas? Or her mortgage payment? Do you honestly and truly think this woman believed Obama would establish some sort of fund to do that? Of course not. No rational person would. What she was saying was that unlike the current and ongoing situation at the time - the mortgage crisis, houses being foreclosed, gas pricing rising - the Obama administration would step in and, with their new policies, bring "Change" that would improve the country. What's so outrageous or foolish about that? Nothing. But, as stated...people purposely misused it on a literal sense to discredit Obama voters...


I think that's exactly what she believed it's just that she's taken a backset to the UAW and the others that Barry owes.

[JTShooter]

God I miss this section...


Alright OP, let me try to help you out here.

This is a forum designed for former, current, and soon to be cops, which often a lot are military vets. Cops (and military) have this evolutionary adaptation called a "Calibrated BullS*** detector". It evolves in cops and military over time due to dealing with people who BS them all day every day. (Criminals, 'upper management', etc). Now, speaking from my own experience, my BS detector goes off anytime a politician speaks. With Presidnet Obama it goes off all the time, even before he was elected. Why? Because he claimed to be unlike "them" and was against "them" yet he uses the same tactics and slogans as others before him.

He promised everything to everyone without ever explaining HOW. Yet he got a pass because the sheep were too blind and deaf to see it. He had/has the media in his pocket. If you disagree then why is it that everyone that was a "threat" to him was instantly labeled and bashed across the board? If you speak out against him you're labeled a "right wing nut job" or "racist" by people at these 24 hour news networks that tell us their opinion is fact.

President Obama scares most of us. Not because he's black or because he doesn't go to the same church. It's because the man is very inexperienced and is relying on former Clinton advisers and many Washington insiders to "guide" him. He and his party led Congress can easily push anything they want now.

You asked about the bipartisanship? How can there be when both sides are so completely divided and want the complete opposite?

President Obama's "plan" to rescue the economy is to throw money (that doesn't exist) at large companies that put THEMSELVES in this position. Where do you think this money is coming from? I'll tell you, we're simply printing more.

Let me use an analogy here. What he is doing is similar to you not having a job but still buying stuff with a credit card. Eventually the bill is going to come and you're not going to have money to pay for it.

President Obama is just another sneaky, criminal politician. He uses the same tactics as others. He uses phrases like "common sense laws" in order to make it sound like if you don't agree, you don't have common sense, nevermind your "common sense" makes no sense.

How does taking away my right to bear arms make the world safer? Full automatic machine guns (after 1986) are illegal to own unless certain steps are taken, yet the criminals have them. Do the liberals of this country truly believe that criminals go to gun shows and gun shops to buy their firearms?

I'm tired of seeing women with 6 children buying milk and baby food using welfare money then walking out to their brand new cadillac SUV (with rims). I'm tired of these people getting a free pass then complaining when they don't get a "cut of the action."

America was setup as a competition based society. Companies only grow and become "big" when they do something better then the rest. People only get the good, high paying jobs because they worked their butt off to get there. Now, we want to punish those who worked hard for their money by raising their taxes. And why is that? Because those that were too lazy or too stupid to excell think it's "not fair" that "they" have more money.

I'm tired of dealing with the lazy, idiotic and inept people that seem to be in the majority now.

I'm tired of liberals (not necessarily Dems) telling ME what's best for ME. I'm tired of people (some on this board) who want to know WHY terrorists are terrorists. WHY criminals are criminals. I'm tired of liberals telling me my friends died in Iraq over oil, that we weren't greeted as liberators, and that the Iraqis don't want us there yet NONE OF THEM have been there.

I'm tired of this baby state the government is producing. President Obama and his ilk realize the only way to stay in power is to make us rely on them for everything. I'm tired of it and it scares me.


Sorry for the rant, just moved and don't have much going on over here right now...

[JasperST]

Well said JT !

[JTShooter]

I'm just tired of the weak, unintelligent sheep whining and complaining about how "unfair" things are. Well I guess ya should have went to college and studied instead of smoked pot all day. Guess you should get a job and actually TRY to get better at it to move up instead of settling for mediocrity and waiting for someone to GIVE you a hand.

I know I'm not going to have a fabulous, high paying job. It was my CHOICE to leave college and join the military. It's MY CHOICE to become a public servant because I realize there are more important things in life then money.

But I guess I'm a dying breed...

[LAschoolCop]

I criticize him him as a bad PERSON due to what you call his "abortion-views". His views have an enormous amount of influence. I think it's mass infanticide.

Monty I disagree with you on this one. I dont consider myself a bad person in fact my best friend has the same views as you on abortion and I avidly support abortion but he does not think I am a bad person just different views and agree to disagree.

[JasperST]

... I love abortion but he does not think I am a bad person just different views and agree to disagree.Are you serious? I can understand how someone could support it but to love it? Do you understand what it is?

[Jellybean400]

Coming off as a bit smug JB.



Thank you! I must be fitting right in here then :)

[nuthead]

God I miss this section...


Alright OP, let me try to help you out here.

This is a forum designed for former, current, and soon to be cops, which often a lot are military vets. Cops (and military) have this evolutionary adaptation called a "Calibrated BullS*** detector". It evolves in cops and military over time due to dealing with people who BS them all day every day. (Criminals, 'upper management', etc). Now, speaking from my own experience, my BS detector goes off anytime a politician speaks. With Presidnet Obama it goes off all the time, even before he was elected. Why? Because he claimed to be unlike "them" and was against "them" yet he uses the same tactics and slogans as others before him.

He promised everything to everyone without ever explaining HOW. Yet he got a pass because the sheep were too blind and deaf to see it. He had/has the media in his pocket. If you disagree then why is it that everyone that was a "threat" to him was instantly labeled and bashed across the board? If you speak out against him you're labeled a "right wing nut job" or "racist" by people at these 24 hour news networks that tell us their opinion is fact.

President Obama scares most of us. Not because he's black or because he doesn't go to the same church. It's because the man is very inexperienced and is relying on former Clinton advisers and many Washington insiders to "guide" him. He and his party led Congress can easily push anything they want now.

You asked about the bipartisanship? How can there be when both sides are so completely divided and want the complete opposite?

President Obama's "plan" to rescue the economy is to throw money (that doesn't exist) at large companies that put THEMSELVES in this position. Where do you think this money is coming from? I'll tell you, we're simply printing more.

Let me use an analogy here. What he is doing is similar to you not having a job but still buying stuff with a credit card. Eventually the bill is going to come and you're not going to have money to pay for it.

President Obama is just another sneaky, criminal politician. He uses the same tactics as others. He uses phrases like "common sense laws" in order to make it sound like if you don't agree, you don't have common sense, nevermind your "common sense" makes no sense.

How does taking away my right to bear arms make the world safer? Full automatic machine guns (after 1986) are illegal to own unless certain steps are taken, yet the criminals have them. Do the liberals of this country truly believe that criminals go to gun shows and gun shops to buy their firearms?

I'm tired of seeing women with 6 children buying milk and baby food using welfare money then walking out to their brand new cadillac SUV (with rims). I'm tired of these people getting a free pass then complaining when they don't get a "cut of the action."

America was setup as a competition based society. Companies only grow and become "big" when they do something better then the rest. People only get the good, high paying jobs because they worked their butt off to get there. Now, we want to punish those who worked hard for their money by raising their taxes. And why is that? Because those that were too lazy or too stupid to excell think it's "not fair" that "they" have more money.

I'm tired of dealing with the lazy, idiotic and inept people that seem to be in the majority now.

I'm tired of liberals (not necessarily Dems) telling ME what's best for ME. I'm tired of people (some on this board) who want to know WHY terrorists are terrorists. WHY criminals are criminals. I'm tired of liberals telling me my friends died in Iraq over oil, that we weren't greeted as liberators, and that the Iraqis don't want us there yet NONE OF THEM have been there.

I'm tired of this baby state the government is producing. President Obama and his ilk realize the only way to stay in power is to make us rely on them for everything. I'm tired of it and it scares me.


Sorry for the rant, just moved and don't have much going on over here right now...

Beautiful...absolutely beautiful!

[JasperST]

Thank you! I must be fitting right in here then :)Not from where I'm sitting.:)

[LAschoolCop]

Are you serious? I can understand how someone could support it but to love it? Do you understand what it is?

Sorry didnt see that I left it like that....Love was from a different statement i was gunna write.....But I am an avid supporter of it. Its a necessary evil.

[Nikk]

Yeah, but Obama is calling the shots now, so what he says goes, for the most part...

Like I said Bush saw what terrorist are capable of, he maybe figured he'd rather keep as many AQ fighters in GITMO or other locations (getting info about who they are and AQ/Taliban) then being in a cave somewhere planning to do more stuff...

God forbid, but if we get hit again like 9/11 do you think Obama will still have the same mind set as he does now?...

It's a damned if you do damned if you don't type situation...

I guess I don't look at some things as being the President rather than being the government. I see America as often unprepared for things that haven't happened. Before Pearl Harbor we hadn't had an attack of that nature. Then we did. Then we put steps in place so that another Pearl Harbor type of attack would not occur, but I don't credit each individual President since then with keeping us safe from an attack from incoming aircraft.

Then we got attacked from within our borders with our own aircraft, which hadn't happened before, and we put steps in place to prevent that from happening again. At first those steps did not include checking shoes at airports, then we had a shoe bomber, then they put that step in place. If that guy's bomb had not failed to light, we'd have had that type of attack during Bush's term. (If we have a bra bomber things will get very interesting at the airports! lol) I don't credit Bush, personally, for there not being another attack of the same nature for the same reason I don't credit each individual President since Pearl Harbor for keeping us safe from another attack of that nature. (Am I making sense?)

So maybe that's why I don't do a lot of "bashing" of individual Presidents. They all work within the same system and the system itself needs improvement.

See? I told you I was boring! lol

[Till]

God I miss this section...


Alright OP, let me try to help you out here.

This is a forum designed for former, current, and soon to be cops, which often a lot are military vets. Cops (and military) have this evolutionary adaptation called a "Calibrated BullS*** detector". It evolves in cops and military over time due to dealing with people who BS them all day every day. (Criminals, 'upper management', etc). Now, speaking from my own experience, my BS detector goes off anytime a politician speaks. With Presidnet Obama it goes off all the time, even before he was elected. Why? Because he claimed to be unlike "them" and was against "them" yet he uses the same tactics and slogans as others before him.

He promised everything to everyone without ever explaining HOW. Yet he got a pass because the sheep were too blind and deaf to see it. He had/has the media in his pocket. If you disagree then why is it that everyone that was a "threat" to him was instantly labeled and bashed across the board? If you speak out against him you're labeled a "right wing nut job" or "racist" by people at these 24 hour news networks that tell us their opinion is fact.

President Obama scares most of us. Not because he's black or because he doesn't go to the same church. It's because the man is very inexperienced and is relying on former Clinton advisers and many Washington insiders to "guide" him. He and his party led Congress can easily push anything they want now.

You asked about the bipartisanship? How can there be when both sides are so completely divided and want the complete opposite?

President Obama's "plan" to rescue the economy is to throw money (that doesn't exist) at large companies that put THEMSELVES in this position. Where do you think this money is coming from? I'll tell you, we're simply printing more.

Let me use an analogy here. What he is doing is similar to you not having a job but still buying stuff with a credit card. Eventually the bill is going to come and you're not going to have money to pay for it.

President Obama is just another sneaky, criminal politician. He uses the same tactics as others. He uses phrases like "common sense laws" in order to make it sound like if you don't agree, you don't have common sense, nevermind your "common sense" makes no sense.

How does taking away my right to bear arms make the world safer? Full automatic machine guns (after 1986) are illegal to own unless certain steps are taken, yet the criminals have them. Do the liberals of this country truly believe that criminals go to gun shows and gun shops to buy their firearms?

I'm tired of seeing women with 6 children buying milk and baby food using welfare money then walking out to their brand new cadillac SUV (with rims). I'm tired of these people getting a free pass then complaining when they don't get a "cut of the action."

America was setup as a competition based society. Companies only grow and become "big" when they do something better then the rest. People only get the good, high paying jobs because they worked their butt off to get there. Now, we want to punish those who worked hard for their money by raising their taxes. And why is that? Because those that were too lazy or too stupid to excell think it's "not fair" that "they" have more money.

I'm tired of dealing with the lazy, idiotic and inept people that seem to be in the majority now.

I'm tired of liberals (not necessarily Dems) telling ME what's best for ME. I'm tired of people (some on this board) who want to know WHY terrorists are terrorists. WHY criminals are criminals. I'm tired of liberals telling me my friends died in Iraq over oil, that we weren't greeted as liberators, and that the Iraqis don't want us there yet NONE OF THEM have been there.

I'm tired of this baby state the government is producing. President Obama and his ilk realize the only way to stay in power is to make us rely on them for everything. I'm tired of it and it scares me.


Sorry for the rant, just moved and don't have much going on over here right now...

I want to shake your hand.

[Nikk]

Monty, I didn't think you were an "Obama basher"...LOL...You're always the voice of reason/conscience...



Are you kidding? Monty is an Obama basher, and doesn't always have the facts straight, he just uses more words!:D lol (You're still Ok Monty!:) )

[Southflaguy]

I guess I don't look at some things as being the President rather than being the government. I see America as often unprepared for things that haven't happened. Before Pearl Harbor we hadn't had an attack of that nature. Then we did. Then we put steps in place so that another Pearl Harbor type of attack would not occur, but I don't credit each individual President since then with keeping us safe from an attack from incoming aircraft.

Then we got attacked from within our borders with our own aircraft, which hadn't happened before, and we put steps in place to prevent that from happening again. At first those steps did not include checking shoes at airports, then we had a shoe bomber, then they put that step in place. If that guy's bomb had not failed to light, we'd have had that type of attack during Bush's term. (If we have a bra bomber things will get very interesting at the airports! lol) I don't credit Bush, personally, for there not being another attack of the same nature for the same reason I don't credit each individual President since Pearl Harbor for keeping us safe from another attack of that nature. (Am I making sense?)

So maybe that's why I don't do a lot of "bashing" of individual Presidents. They all work within the same system and the system itself needs improvement.

See? I told you I was boring! lol


That's how it is, people have to die in order for things to change...I mean who would have thought 4 airplanes would be hijacked, knocking down 2 of the worlds tallest building and one of them slamming into the pentagon...That sounds like something out of a movie...

Once the shock wears off we're back to where we started...

For Bush that was his main concern, make sure another 9/11 doesn't happen...Do whatever it takes, by any means necessary...Maybe Obama will be like that too if, God forbid, something like 9/11 happend on his watch...


You're not boring...:p

Another sandwich?...:D

[Monty Ealerman]

Are you kidding? Monty is an Obama basher, and doesn't always have the facts straight, he just uses more words!:D lol (You're still Ok Monty!:) )Please set me straight on the facts. As far as I know, the only fact I got wrong in the sampler post I quoted earlier was that I accidentally said "Oak Lawn" instead of "Oakbrook Terrace" in one of my references to where Barry's buddy Aiham lives.

Barry was the only State Senator in Illinois who spoke out against a proposed Illinois law (echoing a similar federal law) that would recognize the 14th Amendment rights of a child born via late term induced (with abortion intent) labor if the child accidentally survived.

He apparently thinks it's OK to leave the child crying and dying in the medical waste bin.

From:http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1207159750412&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Jill Stanek, an Illinois nurse, testified in the US Congress in 2000 and 2001 - and before Obama's Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee - about how induced labor abortions were handled at her hospital, relating this story: "One night, a nursing co-worker was taking an aborted Down syndrome baby who was born alive to our Soiled Utility Room because his parents did not want to hold him, and she did not have the time to hold him. I couldn't bear the thought of this suffering child lying alone in a Soiled Utility Room, so I cradled and rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived."

Really, Nikk, that's a fact.

Regards,

Monty

[JTShooter]

That's how it is, people have to die in order for things to change...I mean who would have thought 4 airplanes would be hijacked, knocking down 2 of the worlds tallest building and one of them slamming into the pentagon...That sounds like something out of a movie...



Well, it was a plot of a Tom Clancy book. Only it took place in Chicago (IIRC) and knocked down the Sears Tower as part of a multi pronged attack on the US. It was written what, maybe 10 years before it happened in NYC...

[Taylor13]

Well, it was a plot of a Tom Clancy book. Only it took place in Chicago (IIRC) and knocked down the Sears Tower as part of a multi pronged attack on the US. It was written what, maybe 10 years before it happened in NYC...

Just as a reminder, (not to you specifically JT) after being caught for attempting to knock the trade centers down with a couple of carbombs, and killing/injuring a decent amount of people, they still stood there.

FBI Agent said to the terrorist, flying back from arabland (I think) in a helicopter, points to the WTC, and said "it's still standing" terrorist dude said something like "if we only had enough time/power" or "not for long"

One or more NYC firefighters kept plans of WTC in their locker after the bombing of the WTC. That firefighter knew, they'd be back to finish the job.

[Southflaguy]

Well, it was a plot of a Tom Clancy book. Only it took place in Chicago (IIRC) and knocked down the Sears Tower as part of a multi pronged attack on the US. It was written what, maybe 10 years before it happened in NYC...

Hmm...Never knew that...

[Jellybean400]

I guess I don't look at some things as being the President rather than being the government. I see America as often unprepared for things that haven't happened. Before Pearl Harbor we hadn't had an attack of that nature. Then we did. Then we put steps in place so that another Pearl Harbor type of attack would not occur, but I don't credit each individual President since then with keeping us safe from an attack from incoming aircraft.

Then we got attacked from within our borders with our own aircraft, which hadn't happened before, and we put steps in place to prevent that from happening again. At first those steps did not include checking shoes at airports, then we had a shoe bomber, then they put that step in place. If that guy's bomb had not failed to light, we'd have had that type of attack during Bush's term. (If we have a bra bomber things will get very interesting at the airports! lol) I don't credit Bush, personally, for there not being another attack of the same nature for the same reason I don't credit each individual President since Pearl Harbor for keeping us safe from another attack of that nature. (Am I making sense?)

So maybe that's why I don't do a lot of "bashing" of individual Presidents. They all work within the same system and the system itself needs improvement.

See? I told you I was boring! lol

Youre not boring. And youre right. We werent prepared.

And ONE of the reasons all of the things leading up to 9/11 - and 9/11 itself - were able to happen - is because we are the land of the free, and offer opportunities to everyone. People are free to pursue their dreams, and live their lives the way they want.

Most people, anyway.

[CurlyQ]

Disclaimer: I did not read all the posts on this thread. I thoroughly agree with JTshooter's replies.

To answer the OP's question, I think the Obama bashing stops when Obama starts being real. The man has absolutely no idea what he stands for. He reads from a freakin' screen. He's changed his mind on 2 very important issues just this week. He has no foundation.

GWB had his flaws, but doggone it, he knew what he stood for and he did not waiver. I respect him for that. I wish things turned out better for his administration.

What I see now is a president more proud of his wife's "bare arms" than of the United States of America. This president seems more in tune with BSing in front of a camera than solving America's problems. He seems to have absolutely no idea what he's gotten himself into. Thank goodness Cheney is speaking up. It's no coincidence that Obama has changed positions on such important matters recently.

I believe this country is going to H*E* double toothpicks. It's beyond belief really cuz I thought I'd be long gone before the dumbing of America would win over common sense. It sure is interesting to watch, though.

[Kieth M.]

Well, it was a plot of a Tom Clancy book. Only it took place in Chicago (IIRC) and knocked down the Sears Tower as part of a multi pronged attack on the US. It was written what, maybe 10 years before it happened in NYC...

The Tom Clancy book, IIRC, is Debt of Honor. A JAL pilot, angry over the loss of his family member and the US beating the combined Japanese/Indian attack on America crashes his jumbo jet into the Capitol Building as the POTUS is addressing a joint session of Congress. POTUS is killed, and Jack Ryan, the recently appointed VP is now POTUS.

The "plane into building plot" was actually tried 20 years before that, by a mentally-ill American, angry at the government. I saw it on a 20/20(?) episode, and will try to track it down.

Edited to add: And here it is...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Byck

[FJDave]

When will the Obamabashing stop? Not for MANY years.

[Nikk]

Please set me straight on the facts. As far as I know, the only fact I got wrong in the sampler post I quoted earlier was that I accidentally said "Oak Lawn" instead of "Oakbrook Terrace" in one of my references to where Barry's buddy Aiham lives.

Barry was the only State Senator in Illinois who spoke out against a proposed Illinois law (echoing a similar federal law) that would recognize the 14th Amendment rights of a child born via late term induced (with abortion intent) labor if the child accidentally survived.

He apparently thinks it's OK to leave the child crying and dying in the medical waste bin.

From:http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1207159750412&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull


Really, Nikk, that's a fact.

Regards,

Monty

That he voted against the bill when it contained certain wording is a fact, the rest, not so much. For example there was never a bill that said anything about leaving a surviving fetus in a closet! That's sensationalism of a case that was already against hospital policy and existing law. The bill was similar to a NHM type of situation. There are other things incorrect about the list you posted, and some is correct but irrelevant reaching to force the appearance of an "association". It reminds me of a similar list that had all of Bush's "associations" with the bin Ladens, which was quite a long list! But it, too, was misleading, since anyone in oil is going to be associated with the bin Ladens. They're a HUGE global family. Only Osama is a bad guy but the list was designed to make people think "bin Laden" = Osama. There are always lists like that about politicians.

But this is not a debate of that sort of Obama stuff and I'm not going to get into a point by point. I just like facts with no spin, no matter who it is about. That's how I roll. :) You're fine to have your opinions, I was just teasing you a little!

[cjmajor1807]

Why is it that every time I go look in the general topics forum, I don't look far before seeing a huge thread about the latest hate piece from Fox news about Obama, followed by post after post of hate for the Commander in Chief and those who support him? I just don't get it. This man is now the top dog in law enforcement. That's what the executive branch is all about, yet this ugly, hatefilled mindset takes over the ideology of the men and women of these forums, many of whom now in-directly work below him.

Yes, I voted for the man, and while I haven't fallen in love with everything he has done, for the most part, he hasn't really screwed up. Yes he spent a lot of money, but as they say, it takes money to make money, and a spending bill was the only feesible way out of the economic decline, at least in many people's thinking.

Not only this, but Obama has reached out on numerous occassions to Republicans for bi-partisanship, and was slapped down, with a resounding, "our way or the highway" from the GOP.

I don't like Democrats, they are full of themselves and treat conservatives like idiots. But Obama hasn't become a Pelosi, or a Olberman. He is still a man of ideals who reaches out for compromise. Why won't he see this back from people on the right? Even the people on this forum, who have little reason to dislike the man who has given taxbreaks and attemped to rescue the economy, still find it in their duty to berate and knock down the ruler of the free world, for little more reason than, "it's fun to hate."

I don't think it will ever stop, I didn't vote for the man because I don't agree with his stances, however, I realize that he has adopted this "crisis" (I say this because even though the economy is SOOO bad, spending on video games and electronics is WAY up), and he is doing what he feels is right. If you can come up with a better plan, then by all means take it to your congress person and introduce it, if you just want to bash someone, stop, its not doing anyone any good.

I don't agree with spending that amount of money. Everyone says that it was the massive government spending that got us out of the great depression. It wasn't the spending, it was WWII, without it, our economy would have just kept going downward because our allies were fighting a war, and would not purchase something from us. I don't have another way to jump start the economy so I am not going to say that they shouldn't have a spending bill, I just think some of the programs should have been taken out of the bill. Just my .02

[Jellybean400]

Good posts - both above ^^

Definitely true Nikk, regarding the sensationalism.

[Nikk]

(I say this because even though the economy is SOOO bad, spending on video games and electronics is WAY up)

So is spending on guns and ammo! :D

[FNA209]

So is spending on guns and ammo! :D



It was one of the major industry sales increases noted since he got elected. So in fairness, I guess we can't say he is "all-bad" for the economy.

People are saying he deserves the "Gun Salesman of the Year" award. :D

[Nikk]

It was one of the major industry sales increases noted since he got elected. So in fairness, I guess we can't say he is "all-bad" for the economy.

People are saying he deserves the "Gun Salesman of the Year" award. :D

See, he DID stimulate the economy! ;)

[FNA209]

Restating the issue:

It boils down to core beliefs. There are people who do not agree with what Obama is doing. Since the discussion always seemed to bring up past history which doesn't really have a bearing on this discussion, there were people who didn't agree with what Bush did. Then of course add in the disagreement with the actions Congress are currently underwriting.

Every citizen should have an opinion. Every citizen needs to voice their opinion. Every citizen should be educated in the facts and issues. Every citizen should vote their conscience. Every citizen has the right to vocally disagree with the practices of government.

Being perfectly blunt, screw anyone who says I or any other citizen doesn't have the right to bash a politician. If you have a love affair with a particular politician, that's great. Others don't and need not be quiet about it. It's my country. I can and will use my core beliefs when I judge the actions of my government. When they violate them, I will oppose them regardless of anyone else's core beliefs which they have the right to embrace.

If I'm ultra religious or athesist, a communist or socialist or capitalist, right wing or left, it makes little difference. I have my opinion. If you wish to debate the reasonableness of my opinion with me in an attempt to change my mind, that's fine. A reasonable debate is always refreshing. You can even say my opinions are wrong in which case I don't care. I live my life based on those core beliefs and will use them as my barometer.

[Nikk]

I'm still not completely sure on the definition ... what is considered disagreement with a politician's actions or stand on certain issues, and what is considered "bashing"?

[FNA209]

I'm still not completely sure on the definition ... what is considered disagreement with a politician's actions or stand on certain issues, and what is considered "bashing"?


If we use the OP in this thread as the definitive answer, disagreeing with Obama is bashing! :p

Literally, bashing is a term meaning to hit or, colloquially, to assault but when it is used as a suffix, or in conjunction with a noun indicating the subject being attacked, it is normally used to imply a sense of uncompromising vehemence and bigotry about the assailant.

The term applies to two different types of attack: physical assault and verbal or critical assault. In the latter case, bashing is used metaphorically to indicate an attack on a subject that is of similar aggressiveness and motivation to the physical case.

Topics which attract bashing tend to be personally sensitive topics for the bashers, the victims or both. They also tend to be highly partisan issues. Common areas include religion, nationality, sexuality, politics and topics of critical appraisal within fandom.

It’s used by people to invoke emotions as in “You are not voicing disagreement – You are bashing him. How rude!” It’s frequently used as an attempt to silence someone.

I say I don’t like gays- I’m a gay-basher. (I also get tag-teamed because I’m then a homophobe)

I say affirmative action is wrong- I’m bashing minorities. (Same tag-team method so I can be called a racist)

Disclaimer: The above two examples don’t reflect my personal views. They are simply explanations.

[JasperST]

I don't think it will ever stop, I didn't vote for the man because I don't agree with his stances, however, I realize that he has adopted this "crisis" (I say this because even though the economy is SOOO bad, spending on video games and electronics is WAY up), and he is doing what he feels is right. If you can come up with a better plan, then by all means take it to your congress person and introduce it, if you just want to bash someone, stop, its not doing anyone any good.There's the B word again. Hitler did what he thought was right too, that didn't make it right. And congress critters listen to lobbyists and special interest groups far more than constituents.
I don't agree with spending that amount of money. Everyone says that it was the massive government spending that got us out of the great depression. It wasn't the spending, it was WWII, without it, our economy would have just kept going downward because our allies were fighting a war, and would not purchase something from us. I don't have another way to jump start the economy so I am not going to say that they shouldn't have a spending bill, I just think some of the programs should have been taken out of the bill. Just my .02I'd like to know where you got that from. How did the massive spending on the war turn the economy around?

[Monty Ealerman]

That he voted against the bill when it contained certain wording is a fact, the rest, not so much.
Oh come on! BE HONEST! He stood up and argued that live born babies who had been intended to be aborted should be lawfully killable. THAT IS A FACT! YES HE DID!

Even after the bill was amended to include wording that further ensured that it wouldn't restrict abortion, he was still against it. He lied when he said he would have voted in favor of it if it had included such wording. When it did, he didn't vote for it. He killed it in committee. Effectively, he aborted the bill, by ensuring that it never got to a vote on the Senate floor.

He thinks that if a woman contracts for an abortion, she's ipso facto entitled to a DEAD BABY, even if in order to get one she has to let it die of exposure after it's born alive. YES HE DOES! That's the position he argued for!

You accused me of being nonfactual. Here's what you said:
Are you kidding? Monty is an Obama basher, and doesn't always have the facts straight, he just uses more words! lol (You're still Ok Monty!)Thanks for the "you're still Ok". I'm still waiting for you to point out something I said that was contrary to fact. Please straighten me out on the facts if I have any of them wrong.
For example there was never a bill that said anything about leaving a surviving fetus in a closet! I didn't say there was a bill that used such language. There was in fact a bill that said that a child born alive even if by induced labor was entitled to its Constutional rights, and BARRY spoke AGAINST that. YES HE DID. It's on the record. THAT'S A FACT!

The law didn't mention the horrible practice of treating live babies as medical waste. YES, that practice exists in FACT. The law was largely intended to oppose such evil.
That's sensationalism of a case that was already against hospital policy and existing law.Rubbish. They kill many babies this way. Even though only a small percentage of the thousands of abortions that happen every day are in such manner, it still happens day in and day out. That's a fact.

The bill was similar to a NHM type of situation.No. It was simlar to HR 4292, the "Born Alive Infants Protection Act of 2000". It said that if an infant is born alive it is entitled to protection against being killed.

There are other things incorrect about the list you posted,Such as ? ... Please correct me if I'm wrong. I think I'm right.
and some is correctSo which of that litany of Barry's wrongdoings are you admitting are facts?
but irrelevantIrrelevant to what?
reaching to force the appearance of an "association".I'm not "reaching to force the appearance of an association". Please open your sharp eyes and accept the obvious. There IS a set of associations. Barry for example is directly and inescapably associated with Tony Rezko, Aiham Al Sammarie, and others of their ilk. What I posted is not just a list of names. It says something about the wrongful dealings Barry has had with the persons.
It reminds me of a similar list that had all of Bush's "associations" with the bin Ladens, which was quite a long list!It's not a "similar list". I wasn't trying to exculpate anyone, anyway. I was trying to inculpate Barry.
But it, too, was misleading,You haven't shown anything I've said to be misleading.
since anyone in oil is going to be associated with the bin Ladens. They're a HUGE global family.And most everyone who buys gum arabic has to get it from them too.

Barry, on the other hand, has the distinction of having had regular lunches at home and other meetings with people who have participated in stealing millions from the US, and has endorsed the thieves with letters personally signed by him that he's later lied about having signed.

That's a fact.

Only Osama is a bad guy but the list was designed to make people think "bin Laden" = Osama.Well we know Osama is a bad guy, but we haven't established that any of the other Bin Ladens are, or are not.
There are always lists like that about politicians.No. There are not. The list of Barry's obviously bad associations is way over the top.
But this is not a debate of that sort of Obama stuff and I'm not going to get into a point by point.I tend to prefer point by point.
I just like facts with no spin, no matter who it is about. That's how I roll. :)You haven't refuted EVEN ONE thing I've asserted to be FACT.
You're fine to have your opinions,Thank you for your graciousness regarding that, but, for example, Vera Baker's sordid association with Barry is not my opinion; it's a fact.
I was just teasing you a little!Thanks. ;)

Regards,

Monty

[JTShooter]

The Tom Clancy book, IIRC, is Debt of Honor. A JAL pilot, angry over the loss of his family member and the US beating the combined Japanese/Indian attack on America crashes his jumbo jet into the Capitol Building as the POTUS is addressing a joint session of Congress. POTUS is killed, and Jack Ryan, the recently appointed VP is now POTUS.

The "plane into building plot" was actually tried 20 years before that, by a mentally-ill American, angry at the government. I saw it on a 20/20(?) episode, and will try to track it down.

Edited to add: And here it is...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Byck

Ah, that's it. Been a while since I've read it. Wonder where I got Sears Tower from.....:confused:

[JTShooter]

I don't agree with spending that amount of money. Everyone says that it was the massive government spending that got us out of the great depression. It wasn't the spending, it was WWII, without it, our economy would have just kept going downward because our allies were fighting a war, and would not purchase something from us. I don't have another way to jump start the economy so I am not going to say that they shouldn't have a spending bill, I just think some of the programs should have been taken out of the bill. Just my .02


The difference between then and now is that the government was putting the money back into the working man's hand by giving massive contracts out to factories and businesses around the country to build items for the war effort, which created jobs.

You should read more about WWII and in particular the events leading up to our involvement. We were selling goods (ammo, medical supplies, parts, etc) to England during just about the whole conflict. Even before our involvement in the fighting. The powers at be were secretly sending supplies to England in commercial ships across the Atlantic. That's why the German Uboats were actively sinking our ships and why some wanted to use the sinking of the ships as reason to go to war. However the people in charge were actually intelligent and knew that if we used that as the reason to go to war, the German's would turn around and show that we were secretly fighting them and we would have been dragged into the fight.

The government knew that with the depression and the xenophobic movement that was flowing through the country at this time that there was no way the people of the US would support a fight against the Germans. It was often said "it's their problem".

Fortunately for Europe and the free world the Japanese attacked and gave us reason to fight and reason for the people of the US to support the war.

Because even Sun Tzu mentioned, if you don't have the support of your people, you can not fight, let alone win a war.

There's a lot more that went on then what is shown in the movies ;)

[Nikk]

Oh come on! BE HONEST!

I am always honest. Thank you. If you're going to say I lie, we're done.

You accused me of being nonfactual.

No honey, I did not accuse you of anything. I said some of the items on your list were not factual, I did not assume you put that list together yourself as I am pretty sure I have seen it before?

Thanks for the "you're still Ok".

To clarify, I do not use sarcasm or any hidden innuendos, I'm a straight shooter. 'You're still OK' was intended to show you I meant nothing negative towards you. If you took it somehow as a negative comment, I apologize for the misunderstanding.

I'm still waiting for you to point out something I said that was contrary to fact.

I did, and you called it rubbish, which is why we will not continue. We'll get to that.

I didn't say there was a bill that used such language.

Actually I was referring to the Jill Stanek quote, that's what she is intending to imply or put in people's heads, that is what I was referring to as sensationalism.

You said: "He apparently thinks it's OK to leave the child crying and dying in the medical waste bin." He didn't say "I think it's OK to leave a child lying and dying in a medical waste bin" and a bill didn't say that was "OK".

The law didn't mention the horrible practice of treating live babies as medical waste. YES, that practice exists in FACT. The law was largely intended to oppose such evil.

That's not a "practice" it was a breach of hospital policy and law. The hospital had a comfort care policy. The practice of car theft exists in FACT too, but it's illegal. Did you read the bill? (Maybe in text only that question has a "tone", but it doesn't. Many - probably most - people read articles about bills but not the actual bill itself, and I am always curious if a person read it or not, that's all.)

Rubbish. They kill many babies this way. Even though only a small percentage of the thousands of abortions that happen every day are in such manner, it still happens day in and day out. That's a fact.

And this is why we won't continue. My words are not rubbish and neither is what I said. If my posts are dismissed as rubbish to you, then we can't have a rational discussion. It is and was already the policy of that hospital to provide comfort care in a NHM situation, that is a fact. Therefore what the nurse allegedly did was not an accepted practice there.

No. It was simlar to HR 4292, the "Born Alive Infants Protection Act of 2000". It said that if an infant is born alive it is entitled to protection against being killed.

It was similar, yes, with slightly different wording in three places when you look at both bills side by side. But it does deal with NHM, as I said. Part of the dispute was who decides viability.

Such as ? ... Please correct me if I'm wrong. I think I'm right.
So which of that litany of Barry's wrongdoings are you admitting are facts?

And this is another reason why we won't continue. This is not a case of me "not admitting" wrong doings. Here's the thing, when you have a list of things about a person and someone researches each item, if they find a few that are not factual or are sensationalized, the list itself and the point of it loses credibility, so it is in the person's best interest to have a smaller, well researched list that one cannot shoot ANY holes in. Sort of like hard physical evidence vs. circumstantial evidence. This is all I'm saying. I'm actually trying to help, but I realize it's difficult for people to be objective in these matters.

This is why I don't like things like forwarded emails or outrage over sound bytes (like, Obama's plane has the flag in the same place as McCain's plane but somehow it's worded as if it's different and people react to it.) They hurt your cause rather than help it. ("You" being generic.)

My problem is, people assume (incorrectly) that if I point out an inaccuracy that means I am "arguing" for "the other side" and they become all defensive, even though I'm not doing that. I dislike being assigned a "side" when I'm simply pointing out inaccuracies in some things (which I do consistently no matter who is being discussed.) People got all confused at the other forum I go to during the campaign because I pointed out media inaccuracies and sensationalism of both candidates and both VP candidates. As I said before, I just like boring facts.

A point by point would take a very long time, and so would an in depth discussion of this particular bill. Notice I didn't say I agree with his vote, but I stand by saying that "Obama is in favor of leaving fetuses in closets" Is not factual, it's spin and sensationalism, and that practice was already unacceptable.

Irrelevant to what?
I'm not "reaching to force the appearance of an association". Please open your sharp eyes and accept the obvious.

Once again , sweetie, I did not assume YOU wrote the list. I don't even care who posts what. I reply to content. I said some of the items are reaching to make a connection. Here is an example:

12. Sami Al Arian, a Professor at the University of Chicago, has a daughter who works for Michelle Obama. He is the North American leader for Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

What is the daughter? I work with people's daughters too, I don't know what all what their father's do or stand for. This is reaching unless the daughter is some sort of criminal, is very closely associated with Michelle Obama (like on a personal level), is in close association with her father (are they? Are they estranged? Do we know?) Michelle Obama hired her personally while knowing she was a criminal....etc. I feel those types of items can be misleading. This is why I said it reminded me of the list of Bush's alleged ties to bin Laden, which it does remind me of. It referenced a connection to Osama bin Laden's sister but didn't mention that the sister is an American citizen who has no "connection" to Osama other than having the same father. She hasn't seen him since she was a child. I like lists to be only that of very close very definite associations, even if that makes them shorter and less impressive lists. That's just me. (Perhaps it's a "do unto others thing"... I have a cousin who is a felon but I haven't seen him since he was 5 yrs old, so I wouldn't want someone to say I associate and am related to felons! lol) It doesn't mean I discount the whole thing, but I research each and every item (if it is of interest to me).

You haven't shown anything I've said to be misleading.

I have, but you're taking it differently than I intended.

And most everyone who buys gum arabic has to get it from them too.

I don't know what this is saying?

Well we know Osama is a bad guy,

Isn't that an opinion type of thing?

I tend to prefer point by point.

Yes but then it becomes long posts that divert the thread from it's intent, which i think in this case would be unfair to the OP.

You haven't refuted EVEN ONE thing I've asserted to be FACT.

I have and I have in other threads too. I know I am an odd person who doesn't get all emotional and it is my nature to look at things from all angles.

Anyway, I thought I should respond since you took the time to write a long post. I hope we have a better understanding now, if not, I tried.

[cjmajor1807]

The difference between then and now is that the government was putting the money back into the working man's hand by giving massive contracts out to factories and businesses around the country to build items for the war effort, which created jobs.

You should read more about WWII and in particular the events leading up to our involvement. We were selling goods (ammo, medical supplies, parts, etc) to England during just about the whole conflict. Even before our involvement in the fighting. The powers at be were secretly sending supplies to England in commercial ships across the Atlantic. That's why the German Uboats were actively sinking our ships and why some wanted to use the sinking of the ships as reason to go to war. However the people in charge were actually intelligent and knew that if we used that as the reason to go to war, the German's would turn around and show that we were secretly fighting them and we would have been dragged into the fight.

The government knew that with the depression and the xenophobic movement that was flowing through the country at this time that there was no way the people of the US would support a fight against the Germans. It was often said "it's their problem".

Fortunately for Europe and the free world the Japanese attacked and gave us reason to fight and reason for the people of the US to support the war.

Because even Sun Tzu mentioned, if you don't have the support of your people, you can not fight, let alone win a war.

There's a lot more that went on then what is shown in the movies ;)

Right they were buying goods from us, but in what form, really what they were doing was sending them supply ship after supply ship...I know that England was "buying" from us but I really wonder if the government ever saw a penny of that. One would think that England would be diverting all of their spending toward the war...I am a huge WWII fan, however, I have never really gotten very far into the politics of it, more of the fighting. I find some of the strategies used to be interesting!

[FNA209]

I think we should open up another thread for the abortion issue. That it's own topic.

Anybody care to do so?

We're supposed to be talking about why some of us disagree with Obama and his policies. Abortion may indeed be one of them, but that needs it's own thread. It kinda of goes with the whole "Does your religious..." thread.

Just a thought.

[Nikk]

I think we should open up another thread for the abortion issue. That it's own topic.

Anybody care to do so?

We're supposed to be talking about why some of us disagree with Obama and his policies. Abortion may indeed be one of them, but that needs it's own thread. It kinda of goes with the whole "Does your religious..." thread.

Just a thought.

That was why I said:


Yes but then it becomes long posts that divert the thread from it's intent, which i think in this case would be unfair to the OP.


I thought it would be rude not to reply at all, but I agree, I do not wish to derail this thread and I apologies for my part in it. I will not respond further to any thing to do with that subject. It was one of those things where I made a simple comment and meant to be light hearted (I even had the little green guy in there ->:D) and it turned into a big thing that I did not intend. My apologies again.

[FNA209]

That was why I said:


Yes but then it becomes long posts that divert the thread from it's intent, which i think in this case would be unfair to the OP.




That's why I love ya. You are very astute. :D

I'm already unpopular, so I'll do it. New thread coming!

[Nikk]

That's why I love ya. You are very astute. :D

I'm already unpopular, so I'll do it. New thread coming!

You're unpopular? I didn't even know you had been elected! We must commence the FNA bashing!:D:D

[FNA209]

You're unpopular? I didn't even know you had been elected! We must commence the FNA bashing!:D:D



I figure I must be because I don't subscribe to to the Obama agenda. And we have a core group of people who don't subscribe to my dislike for him.

But I am used to adversity. Them liberals are always trying to keep me down. :p

Anyway, I started a new threat for you and Monty. That one should get interesting.... real fast. :D

[Taylor13]

It could've been because the Liberty City 7 trial thing came to an end and they would have blown up FBI offices and other landmarks, including Sears Tower.

[Jellybean400]

Hey Nikk... some people will never, EVER admit to being wrong.

If i never knew it in my life, i learned it on here ;)

"Ignore" is your friend :)

[katseiye]

like I've said earlier, I don't pretend to defend the Bush bashers, but just because others have been juvenile doesn't mean the cycle has to continue.
For the record, I never once doubted that former president Bush loved his country. My qualms with him stemmed from a feeling that he didn't portray the United States in a way I appreciated and that some of his policies conflicted with my views. He was not a monster by any means, just not my idea of who I'd like running the country. Obama falls short in some aspects too, but he has gotten much closer in my opinion.

I'm hoping we can gather the common decency to quit the personal attacks on our leaders for their political policy.

As for the bolded statement, I have found in my limited experience, that institutions of higher education are breeding grounds for that kind of behavior.

As for the bulk of the statement, thats exactly the way the opposing side feels about their candidate. Quite and conundrum would'nt you say ?

[katseiye]

The extreme partisans are going to hate Obama regardless of what he does, just as they did with CLinton, and just as the left wing partisans did with G. W. Bush. It's just politics as usual.

I can't believe I actually agree with you on something, although you mistakenly identify the wrong partisan group as extreme.:p

[Monty Ealerman]

Hi Nikk.
I am always honest. Thank you. If you're going to say I lie, we're done.I believe you're honest. I wouldn't have used "be honest" if I didn't think you were an honest person. In fact, I think you're an admirable person, given what I've been able to learn about you on this board. I would not try to impugn your character. You know that saying "be honest" isn't the same thing as calling you a liar. You know it's a colloquialism requesting acknowledgement of something viewed as mutually known, but which is viewed by the requestor as something the other person is reluctant to acknowledge. Even honest people, stuck having to make do with the truth, sometimes are reluctant to 'fess up to something they know is true.
I did not accuse you of anything.You said "doesn't always have the facts straight". I quoted you on that. I wasn't trying to suggest that you were generally castigating me. I think that's fairly and reasonably characterized as accusing me of being nonfactual in the limited context in which I presented that characterization. You subsequently didn't point out any specific instance of my having asserted as a fact something that was not true.
I said some of the items on your list were not factual,You didn't say which ones and what was in error about them.... I did not assume you put that list together yourself as I am pretty sure I have seen it before?Maybe you've seen it on this board before. I did put the post together myself. I got the information from various sources, mostly NOT on the net.

To clarify, I do not use sarcasm or any hidden innuendos, I'm a straight shooter. 'You're still OK' was intended to show you I meant nothing negative towards you. If you took it somehow as a negative comment, I apologize for the misunderstanding.
I took that exactly as you say you intended it.
I'm still waiting for you to point out something I said that was contrary to fact.
I did, and you called it rubbish, ... My words are not rubbish ...All right. I called it rubbish, not because I think in general that your words are rubbish. In fact, I think you are among the most cogent, level-headed, and informative contributors here. I called it rubbish because you responded to my denunciation of Barry for his vocal opposition of a bill designed to protect live-born intended abortion victims by calling it "sensationalism of a case". You disregarded my statements about his opposition, and focused instead on the proffered example of the kind of situation the bill was intended to address. By characterization of the presentation of the example as sensationalism, you presented a position to the effect that this was an isolated incident being inappropriately accentuated. You did not address the fact that Barry spoke against prohibiting such atrocities. Barry did not say that the bill was superfluous. His argument was that it might tend toward restriction of abortion. He argued that, even after the bill was modified to explicitly avoid impact on other abortion practices. Furthermore, the case is in itself horrible. It doesn't have to be sensationalized. The nurse was not lying. It's a horrible thing that actually happens. That's not sensationalism. I think my statements regarding the practice of allowing live born intended abortion victims to die, and regarding Barry's opposition to a law against that practice, is factual. I understand the viability issue. I think viability should be determined by making a diligent attempt to save the life.
... which is why we will not continue. We'll get to that.If we don't continue, how is it that we're still going to "get to that"? I intend to retain my own dialectic options, as you do yours.
I didn't say there was a bill that used such language.
Actually I was referring to the Jill Stanek quote, that's what she is intending to imply or put in people's heads, that is what I was referring to as sensationalism.It's not sensationalism. That baby is in fact dead. She swore it was the truth. I believe her. Perhaps Christ Hospital has a written policy of treating its live birth abortion victims nicely? So what. The babies still wind up dead. And Barry still doesn't vote in favor of that being outlawed. Even ones who could be be saved. Those are facts. They shouldn't be doing any kind of optative abortions anyway, especially not in the name of Christ, and especially not live birth or partial birth abortions.
You said: "He apparently thinks it's OK to leave the child crying and dying in the medical waste bin." He didn't say "I think it's OK to leave a child lying and dying in a medical waste bin" and a bill didn't say that was "OK".I didn't say Barry SAID that was OK. I said "he apparently thinks it's OK", because he argued against a bill that would have prohibited it. That's a fact.

The law didn't mention the horrible practice of treating live babies as medical waste. YES, that practice exists in FACT. The law was largely intended to oppose such evil.

That's not a "practice" it was a breach of hospital policy and law.It IS a practice. They do it. Regardless of stated policy and unenforced law, it is in fact done. That's why the new law was written. You yourself just said "... it was a breach ...". You know that means, among other things it means, that it happened. It doesn't mean it didn't happen. You admit that it happened. No-one was punished for it. It was allowed.
The hospital had a comfort care policy.Oh so they always wrap the baby in a blankie, and sit and rock the baby, and say things like "aww, there there, diddums, try to enjoy your slow death". I don't find it difficult to imagine that some of the staff might get a little negligent about comforting the babies they're killing.
The practice of car theft exists in FACT too, but it's illegal.That's not a parallel situation. Barry didn't argue against a law prohibiting auto theft. Barry argued against a law prohibiting the killing of infants born alive after procedures intended to have been abortifacient. They do kill those kids by treating them as medical waste, and they do so with impunity. That's a fact. The bill was an attempt to put a stop to that practice, and Barry was against that attempt at putting a stop to that practice. That's a fact.
Did you read the bill?
I read the federal version.
And this is why we won't continue.And continuing ...
This is not a case of me "not admitting" wrong doings.No, it's a case of you admitting that some of the things I said are true, and not being willing to specify which ones.
Here's the thing, when you have a list of things about a person and someone researches each item, if they find a few that are not factual ...Please specify which ones you think are not factual. And please acknowledge which of them you think are factual. I'll be glad to pare my litany if any of it can be shown to untrue or even reasonably questionable.
... or are sensationalized,Even if they are true?
... the list itself and the point of it loses credibility,Someone found guilty on only 1 count of a 10 count indictment is still guilty.
... so it is in the person's best interest to have a smaller, well researched list that one cannot shoot ANY holes in. That's a non sequitur. Getting hit by a scatter gun is worse than getting missed by a rifle.
Sort of like hard physical evidence vs. circumstantial evidence.And whence the provenance thereof? You know people get convicted on circumstantial evidence, and get acquitted despite physical evidence, every day.
This is all I'm saying.No it isn't.
I'm actually trying to help,I believe you genuinely are doing that.
but I realize it's difficult for people to be objective in these matters.I think that's condescending. Facts are still facts, whether I like them or not. "You have a right to your own opinion; however, you do not have a right to your own facts." (Daniel Patrick Moynihan)

My problem is, people assume (incorrectly) that if I point out an inaccuracy ... I can't see where you pointed one out here.
... that means I am "arguing" for "the other side" and they become all defensive, even though I'm not doing that.I'm not assuming that either you or Barry is arguing in favor of leaving babies in medical waste bins. But he did in fact argue against outlawing that. That's not sensationalism. Barry in fact did that.
I dislike being assigned a "side" when I'm simply pointing out inaccuracies in some things (which I do consistently no matter who is being discussed.)What inaccuracies did you point out here? I don't think I assigned you a "side" either. I hope it isn't a surprise to you that I know that people don't always accept a whole party line when they agree or disagree with something someone said.

People got all confused at the other forum I go to during the campaign because I pointed out media inaccuracies and sensationalism of both candidates and both VP candidates.I believe you, but I wouldn't know from personal experience, because I wasn't there. I am aware that people are not always reasonable.
As I said before, I just like boring facts.Do you see the implicit condescension? It's as if you're saying "unlike me, you are bored with mere facts, and have to resort to sensationalism, to which I never resort, because I am content with the facts". I can't see that you have presented any facts contrary to that which I have presented as facts.
A point by point would take a very long time, ...But if you don't do a point-by-point, it's easy to drop points, and act as if they were addressed when in fact they weren't.
... and so would an in depth discussion of this particular bill.I don't think the bill required a lot of discussion. It was pretty simple. Stop killing the live babies born from attempted abortions. That's not very hard to understand.
Notice I didn't say I agree with his vote,I did notice that. Neither did the rest of the Senate agree. He stood alone in arguing in opposition to that bill.
but I stand by saying that "Obama is in favor of leaving fetuses in closets" Is not factual, it's spin and sensationalism, and that practice was already unacceptable.Who said that about Barry? I didn't say Barry was in favor of that; I said he was in favor of not outlawing the practice.

I respect you, Nikk, and I think you're a good and conscientious person, but I think you're wrong about Barry, and I think you're inappropriately characterizing as as "spin" and "sensationalism" the sworn testimony about the practice of killing live infants who had been intended to be dead abortion victims. This horrible practice really does happen. That's why the law was drafted. And Barry stood up against that proposed law.
Once again , sweetie, I did not assume YOU wrote the list.
Once again, condescending. I did write what I wrote. I acknowledge that it includes information I didn't acquire firsthand, and that I didn't include attributions.
I don't even care who posts what.Well you brought that matter up here.
I reply to content.OK, then let's get to content.
I said some of the items are reaching to make a connection. Here is an example:
12. Sami Al Arian, a Professor at the University of Chicago, has a daughter who works for Michelle Obama. He is the North American leader for Palestinian Islamic Jihad.Good. Now we're discussing content.
What is the daughter? I work with people's daughters too, I don't know what all what their father's do or stand for. This is reaching unless the daughter is some sort of criminal, is very closely associated with Michelle Obama (like on a personal level), is in close association with her father (are they? Are they estranged? Do we know?)I don't object to your calling it reaching, but it is factual. As far as I know, the daughter is not a criminal. She lived with her father and worked directly for Michelle as a personal assistant. This is an association that would be questioned if anyone in either household were to be investigated for an ordinary security clearance. It might not by itself necessarily be disqualifying, but it is yet another apparant instance of Barry not eschewing personal association with Islamist terrorism sponsors.
Michelle Obama hired her personally while knowing she was a criminal....etc. I feel those types of items can be misleading.I didn't cast aspersions or draw conclusions when I said what I said about the daughter working for Michelle. I just stated the fact, and relied on res ipsa loquitur (the thing itself speaks). None of what you've said here qualifies as an example of my not always having the facts straight, which is something you said was true regarding me.
This is why I said it reminded me of the list of Bush's alleged ties to bin Laden, which it does remind me of. It referenced a connection to Osama bin Laden's sister but didn't mention that the sister is an American citizen who has no "connection" to Osama other than having the same father. She hasn't seen him since she was a child.I understand. I have 2 letters written to my grandfather by Senator Prescott Bush, who did business with Germans before WWII. I'm sure that doesn't make me a fascist.
I like lists to be only that of very close very definite associations, even if that makes them shorter and less impressive lists. That's just me.I am not against your writing as you prefer.

(Perhaps it's a "do unto others thing"... I have a cousin who is a felon but I haven't seen him since he was 5 yrs old, so I wouldn't want someone to say I associate and am related to felons! lol) It doesn't mean I discount the whole thing, but I research each and every item (if it is of interest to me).I know some bad guys, but if I were to have them over to luncheon conferences at my house without articulable and defensible good reasons, I don't think I would be doing any more professional work for government agencies and major businesses.

You haven't shown anything I've said to be misleading.
I have, but you're taking it differently than I intended.Well I think you haven't. Can you be more specific regarding how you think you have?

And most everyone who buys gum arabic has to get it from them too.

I don't know what this is saying?It's saying that the Bin Laden family controls the world supply of gum arabic, so that people who need to buy it may have to go to them to get it, and consequently it suggests that such a level of association with them may not necessarily be reprehensible.

Well we know Osama is a bad guy,

Isn't that an opinion type of thing?
Are you honestly suggesting that maybe he's not a bad guy? Please understand that I'm not trying to suggest that you're not honest. In my opinion, if OBL is not a bad guy, the term has no legitimate referent.

I tend to prefer point by point.
Yes but then it becomes long posts that divert the thread from it's intent, which i think in this case would be unfair to the OP.Yes, long posts, but not really very extratopical. The OP was concerned about the "bashing", and we've been discussing reasons for doing that or not. I don't think that's unfair.

You haven't refuted EVEN ONE thing I've asserted to be FACT.
I have and I have in other threads too.Please specify.
I know I am an odd person who doesn't get all emotional...So that seems to mean that you think that other people get too emotional, and that you don't. That's mere argumentum ad hominem....and it is my nature to look at things from all angles.Oh, and others don't? I try to look at this one from the angle of defenseless babies crying and dying in the medical waste bin, while sworn physicians disregard their cries.
Anyway, I thought I should respond since you took the time to write a long post.That's nice of you, and I mean that sincerely.
I hope we have a better understanding now, if not, I tried.Well thanks for trying. I think we have more understanding, but I don't think it's necessarily better. To me, the important thing, in the context of the original post, is that Barry does not deserve that anyone should desist from "bashing" him, as he continues to deserve the disapprobation. Exemplary in this regard is his favor toward the untrammelled right to kill even viable live born babies if they were intended to have been born dead.

Regards,

Monty

[RoadKingTrooper]

Oh come on! BE HONEST! He stood up and argued that live born babies who had been intended to be aborted should be lawfully killable. THAT IS A FACT! YES HE DID!

Even after the bill was amended to include wording that further ensured that it wouldn't restrict abortion, he was still against it. He lied when he said he would have voted in favor of it if it had included such wording. When it did, he didn't vote for it. He killed it in committee. Effectively, he aborted the bill, by ensuring that it never got to a vote on the Senate floor.

He thinks that if a woman contracts for an abortion, she's ipso facto entitled to a DEAD BABY, even if in order to get one she has to let it die of exposure after it's born alive. YES HE DOES! That's the position he argued for!

You accused me of being nonfactual. Here's what you said:
Thanks for the "you're still Ok". I'm still waiting for you to point out something I said that was contrary to fact. Please straighten me out on the facts if I have any of them wrong.
I didn't say there was a bill that used such language. There was in fact a bill that said that a child born alive even if by induced labor was entitled to its Constutional rights, and BARRY spoke AGAINST that. YES HE DID. It's on the record. THAT'S A FACT!

The law didn't mention the horrible practice of treating live babies as medical waste. YES, that practice exists in FACT. The law was largely intended to oppose such evil.
Rubbish. They kill many babies this way. Even though only a small percentage of the thousands of abortions that happen every day are in such manner, it still happens day in and day out. That's a fact.

No. It was simlar to HR 4292, the "Born Alive Infants Protection Act of 2000". It said that if an infant is born alive it is entitled to protection against being killed.

Such as ? ... Please correct me if I'm wrong. I think I'm right.
So which of that litany of Barry's wrongdoings are you admitting are facts?
Irrelevant to what?
I'm not "reaching to force the appearance of an association". Please open your sharp eyes and accept the obvious. There IS a set of associations. Barry for example is directly and inescapably associated with Tony Rezko, Aiham Al Sammarie, and others of their ilk. What I posted is not just a list of names. It says something about the wrongful dealings Barry has had with the persons.
It's not a "similar list". I wasn't trying to exculpate anyone, anyway. I was trying to inculpate Barry.
You haven't shown anything I've said to be misleading.
And most everyone who buys gum arabic has to get it from them too.

Barry, on the other hand, has the distinction of having had regular lunches at home and other meetings with people who have participated in stealing millions from the US, and has endorsed the thieves with letters personally signed by him that he's later lied about having signed.

That's a fact.

Well we know Osama is a bad guy, but we haven't established that any of the other Bin Ladens are, or are not.
No. There are not. The list of Barry's obviously bad associations is way over the top.
I tend to prefer point by point.
You haven't refuted EVEN ONE thing I've asserted to be FACT.
Thank you for your graciousness regarding that, but, for example, Vera Baker's sordid association with Barry is not my opinion; it's a fact.
Thanks. ;)

Regards,

Monty

Hey Monty, you got caught by someone a little bit smarter than you:)
Nikk lists facts, not lists found on the Internet:rolleyes:


Regards,

RoadKINGTrooper:)

[JasperST]

Whew. To be honest, I couldn't read all the way through that hummer.

[Monty Ealerman]

Hi RKT,

I'm a bit dubious about the validity of the "smarter than" relation amongst bright people, which many people here obviously are.

That list you mention was written by me, not copied from the net. I again acknowledge that it includes information I didn't acquire firsthand, and that I didn't include attributions. That does not mean any of it is not true.

Can you indentify anything I cited as a fact in this thread that was not true?

Regards,

Monty

[Monty Ealerman]

Hi again, RKT.

I didn't notice your "Quit picking on Nikk" header earlier. I respect Nikk, and I think she's very smart, and I think that she consistently tries to be fair and rational in her analyses of things. I also think I wasn't picking on her, and that if I were to try to do that, she'd prove amply capable of taking care of herself.

Regards,

Monty

[RoadKingTrooper]

Hi again, RKT.

I didn't notice your "Quit picking on Nikk" header earlier. I respect Nikk, and I think she's very smart, and I think that she consistently tries to be fair and rational in her analyses of things. I also think I wasn't picking on her, and that if I were to try to do that, she'd prove amply capable of taking care of herself.

Regards,

Monty

Wow! two posts nine minutes apart! I would normally feel honored but.................................considering the source:rolleyes:

Let me give you the Monty on this Monty!

Nikk is probably the straightest shooter you will never meet!

She is a Cop, you are not nor have ever been a Cop! Many of us on this board have come to this conclusion jointly and severally.


These Are Private Forums for Law Enforcement.

Your last posts to her fall into the category of TROLL

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Do not feed the trolls" and its abbreviation DNFTT redirect here. For the Wikipedia essay, see "What is a troll?". For other uses see Troll (disambiguation).

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

When you tell Nikk to be honest, the implication is that she hasn't been. It is insulting for an interloper such as yourself to question the veracity of any Cop, much less her.

Please stick with your ego thread and quit pontificating;)

Have the best troll day ever! :)

[Nikk]

With apologies to FNA209... :o I won't reply in this thread to the stuff you started a new thread about, but I'd like to respond to where I feel Monty has misrepresented me.

First, to clarify...

If we don't continue, how is it that we're still going to "get to that"? I intend to retain my own dialectic options, as you do yours.

lol That does sound funny when you put it that way! I meant I was not going to continue beyond that post in this thread (as it was off on a tangent) out of respect for the actual topic and the OP. See my post #144.

Now to address what was said about me...

You know it's a colloquialism requesting acknowledgement of something viewed as mutually known, but which is viewed by the requestor as something the other person is reluctant to acknowledge. Even honest people, stuck having to make do with the truth, sometimes are reluctant to 'fess up to something they know is true.

I am not "reluctant to acknowledge" anything and I do speak the truth, which I have no problem dealing with.

I said: The hospital had a comfort care policy.

You said: Oh so they always wrap the baby in a blankie, and sit and rock the baby, and say things like "aww, there there, diddums, try to enjoy your slow death". I don't find it difficult to imagine that some of the staff might get a little negligent about comforting the babies they're killing.

Comfort care is an acceptable practice, such as in cases of terminal illness and the elderly where "heroic measures" will not save a life. It is not "killing". As a person who has had to make such decisions for terminally ill (dying of incurable cancer) persons whom I deeply loved, your comments are quite hurtful.


I'll string the rest of these all together:

Me: As I said before, I just like boring facts.

You: Do you see the implicit condescension? It's as if you're saying "unlike me, you are bored with mere facts, and have to resort to sensationalism, to which I never resort, because I am content with the facts". I can't see that you have presented any facts contrary to that which I have presented as facts.

-------------------------------------------------------

Me: Once again , sweetie, I did not assume YOU wrote the list.

You: Once again, condescending.

-------------------------------------------------------

Me: I know I am an odd person who doesn't get all emotional...

You: So that seems to mean that you think that other people get too emotional, and that you don't. That's mere argumentum ad hominem.

-------------------------------------------------------

Me: ...and it is my nature to look at things from all angles.

You: Oh, and others don't? I try to look at this one from the angle of a defenseless baby crying and dying in the medical waste bin. While sworn physicians complacently disregard their cries.

My reply to all of the above:

No hon, I really, sincerely, do not see how calling MYSELF boring is being condescending to another. I do not do subtleties (I'm no good at that!) If I say "I just like boring facts" it means exactly that. Why would I say something "AS IF" I'm saying something else? Then do I just hope the person will break the code? That's just... absurd. There was no argumentum ad hominem. If I think you're being too emotional I will say: "Monty, I think you're being too emotional..." I have no problem speaking that directly. In all of the above quotes I am sharing something about myself, and you have twisted it into something "as if" it's about you or others.

To attempt to clarify (about ME): I know this is an emotional topic - and I like boring facts. This causes some people to think I am cold, unfeeling, or unemotional. So to explain that I am not really being cold, I say: "I just like boring facts". Can you understand that?

Monty, seriously, I cannot converse with you if you keep attempting to read between the lines when there is nothing there. That makes no sense to me. If you respect me, as you claim, then please stop saying I'm condescending, etc., and please refrain from putting words in my mouth by claiming "it's AS IF" I am saying something I never said. I find that disrespectful, to put it mildly.


I respect you, Nikk, and I think you're a good and conscientious person, but I think you're wrong about Barry, and I think you're inappropriately characterizing as as "spin" and "sensationalism" the sworn testimony about the practice of killing live infants who had been intended to be dead abortion victims. This horrible practice really does happen.

I said Jill Stanek sensationalized, not you. Did you see her video and her presentation? For example, the part where she used a fully alert, at least a month old, full term baby to represent a non viable 22 week fetus? I consider that sensationalism intended to play to emotion. If you feel that is an inappropriate characterization, you are free to do so.



Now this part brings us back to the actual thread topic:

Are you honestly suggesting that maybe he's not a bad guy? Please understand that I'm not trying to suggest that you're not honest. In my opinion, if OBL is not a bad guy, the term has no legitimate referent.

It doesn't matter if it's Obama or John Doe, saying "bad guy" and "good guy" (especially when it comes to politicians) is always a subjective term. For example, Bush was seen as a very bad guy by those who felt he should be impeached, some even called him a terrorist. By contrast, to others he was seen as a good guy and protector, and to some he's an absolute hero. Both sides had lists to back up their viewpoints. So using these examples, would you agree that calling a politician a bad or good guy is an opinion based on one's personal viewpoint?

[tony.o]

Coming off as a bit smug JB.



M-11

She's not being smug. She's accussing everyone of bashing Obama because he is black.

[JTShooter]

Well, I find it a funny that a pot smoking hippie is upset that people here on a LEO forum don't see things the way she does... but that's because she's smart and we're dumb...

[ray8285]

I am not "reluctant to acknowledge" anything and I do speak the truth, which I have no problem dealing with.

Comfort care is an acceptable practice, such as in cases of terminal illness and the elderly where "heroic measures" will not save a life. It is not "killing". As a person who has had to make such decisions for terminally ill (dying of incurable cancer) persons whom I deeply loved, your comments are quite hurtful.


I said Jill Stanek sensationalized, not you. Did you see her video and her presentation? For example, the part where she used a fully alert, at least a month old, full term baby to represent a non viable 22 week fetus? I consider that sensationalism intended to play to emotion. If you feel that is an inappropriate characterization, you are free to do so.




Truth is in the eye of the beholder....facts stand on there own.

What you are comparing are apples and oranges. You have adults who made decisions and choices---how is that comparable to an unborn baby trying to be killed in the womb, failing and then holding them while they die? Oh and you miss one aspect of your comparison, the adults have tried everything they can do to save their lives, the attemped abortion does nothing, they just let them die.

Bad news, 22 weeks is viable. There have been pre-me's survive at 21 weeks.

[Nikk]

Truth is in the eye of the beholder....facts stand on there own.

What you are comparing are apples and oranges. You have adults who made decisions and choices---how is that comparable to an unborn baby trying to be killed in the womb, failing and then holding them while they die? Oh and you miss one aspect of your comparison, the adults have tried everything they can do to save their lives, the attemped abortion does nothing, they just let them die.

Bad news, 22 weeks is viable. There have been pre-me's survive at 21 weeks.

The facts in that particular case were of a non viable fetus, that is all I was referring to. (Stanek herself did not dispute that FACT.) ONE case, where comfort care was required but not provided. So no, not apples and oranges unless I am generalizing, which I am not. You haven't got a clue what my position is on abortion in general so do not assume. It was already law to take measures to save the life of a viable fetus born alive. I am aware of preemies surviving at 21 weeks, my cousin is one. But that is not what I was referring to. Thank you.

[ray8285]

The facts in that particular case were of a non viable fetus, that is all I was referring to. (Stanek herself did not dispute that FACT.) ONE case, where comfort care was required but not provided. So no, not apples and oranges unless I am generalizing, which I am not. You haven't got a clue what my position is on abortion in general so do not assume. It was already law to take measures to save the life of a viable fetus born alive. I am aware of preemies surviving at 21 weeks, my cousin is one. But that is not what I was referring to. Thank you.

Like you have pointed out to me...no need to highlight honey, I can read just fine with normal fonts.....

The apples and oranges was not adressed, it was adults who made their own decisions and did everything they could to stave off death VS botched abortion where no effort is made to save the life.

[dadyswat]

I may consider stopping bashing when he quits blaming Bush, he's been calling the shots for some now and needs to take responsibility.

[ray8285]

I may consider stopping bashing when he quits blaming Bush, he's been calling the shots for some now and needs to take responsibility.

It's not just him....every time anything comes up, they blame Bush. Pelosi tells a lie "it was Bush's fault"....

[Nikk]

Like you have pointed out to me...no need to highlight honey, I can read just fine with normal fonts.....

The apples and oranges was not adressed, it was adults who made their own decisions and did everything they could to stave off death VS botched abortion where no effort is made to save the life.

I think I see now where I confused you.

This is what I said: Comfort care is an acceptable practice, such as in cases of terminal illness and the elderly where "heroic measures" will not save a life. It is not "killing". As a person who has had to make such decisions for terminally ill (dying of incurable cancer) persons whom I deeply loved, your comments are quite hurtful.

I wasn't making a comparison of anything or speaking of abortion, I was explaining a term. When I said the hospital had a "comfort care" policy (which is relevant to the case being discussed) the other person kept referring to "killing" which led me to believe he didn't understand the meaning of the term "comfort care". (Not everyone does, so that's cool.) So I put it in a context (i.e. the terminally ill) that I thought would be easier to relate to. Sorry I didn't catch that you thought I was "comparing" something. Hope we're on the same page now.

Also bolding wasn't meant to say you can't read normal fonts! lol It's the only way to try to put an inflection on words (like you can when speaking) when there's just text.

[ray8285]

1) This is what I said: [I]Comfort care is an acceptable practice, such as in cases of terminal illness and the elderly where "heroic measures" will not save a life.

2) your comments are quite hurtful.

3) I wasn't making a comparison of anything or speaking of abortion, I was explaining a term.

4) Also bolding wasn't meant to say you can't read normal fonts! .

1) Sounds very similar to hospice services, only in the hospital rather than at home.

2) For that I am truly sorry.

3) You were speaking about a single case, I was speaking in general, and about what the law would require...

4) I know...you busted my chops a while back for using caps in a sentence:D

[ray8285]

Back to the main topic:

I find it very entertaining when I listen to my local talk radio and they dems call in complaining about picking on POTUS. These same people were screaming about GWB from day 1, and calling him every name in the book but the one he was born with. I have yet to hear or see the vitriolic GWB put up with for the last eight years.

[JasperST]

It just goes to show how truly spineless the left is. Imagine if Obama was ridiculed on comedy/talk shows, books and movies, including his assassination.

An oldie but still relevant....

http://www.therightperspective.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/democrat-party-seal.jpg